On Dec 6, 2007 12:11 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>
> >> I don't see why
> >> a particular package couldn't be served from more than one repository.
> >> Is there some rule about that?
> >
> > Nope. As a matter of fact, this sort of thing is likely when mixing repos,
> > and is why a commitment to collaboration is essential.
>
> The point is that as an end user, I want a sensible way to deal with
> multiple repositories that _don't_ collaborate. After all, if everyone
> agreed on policies we wouldn't need any third party repositories at all.
Ok the problem field is that you have N different repositories, using
M different guidelines, using O different compile flags, and P
different filesystem layouts. The best you could possibly do is not
have packages at all but keep each package in a dmg file and let the
ld fight it out over who gets executed today... but that would seem to
be a different OS.
> The reason I want something from somewhere else may be precisely
> because they do things differently. In fact, I'd love to see an
> optional repository that could be used from Centos whose policy was
> basically that packages had been released in fedora for at least a month
> with no system-crashing bugs reported against it or dependencies.
>
> --
> Les Mikesell
> lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
