On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 01:15:08PM -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 05:12:06PM -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: >>> But it would be even better if we could live with the assumption that >>> repos will have incompatibilities, whether accidental or intentional. >>> Then it would become a choice of which to install and things wouldn't >>> break when somewhere else updates first. Then you could focus on making >>> your versions better instead of compatible - and the politics wouldn't >>> matter. >> >> Sorry, that's not possible. Just to give an example: For some reason >> you favour repo A and make it trump over repo B. Both repos ship >> libfoo and repo B ships also appbaz needing libfoo with a couple more >> configure options turned on. >> >> No smart package manager in the world will detect this breakage. One >> could strat thinking about stricter dependencies etc. but there will >> always be real-world scenarios like the above spoiling your master >> plan. > > How much more information would rpm/yum need to store and consider in order > to understand that they should never overwrite a package from one > repository with one from a different repository without explicit > instructions? Les, please read the example again. It assumes that rpm/yum already does so (and indeed with some plugins you can do that), but shows that you still end up with a broken system. > Permitting explicit repository-specific dependencies would be > nice too, although that could be worked around given the ability to control > the initial repo for a package and an understanding that no other repo's > version should replace it without permission even if it has the same name > and a higher version number. I'll just repeat myself: If the packagers don't cooperate no technical solution will be able to really cover compatibilty problems. You'll paper over some of them and create a false feeling that you have mastered the compatibility problem and still wonder later why it doesn't work. I've seen dozen of such false bug reports which I call "partial/selective enabling of repos". Google the last term and you find many bad examples of such "solutions". -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpxRYgoEjyIE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
