R P Herrold wrote:
> 'priorities' falls over and dies at that point from
> self-induced dependency hell, and CentOS is blamed for it in
> the back splatter. I was the wiki article editor who
> initially added that caveat section, after seeing priorities
> being pushed as the 'best' alternative.
>
> It is not. It is more like Russian roulette without peeking
> at the state of the chamber, for your installation. The
> mentioned 'exclude' and 'includepkg' approach is more correct,
> but also requires reading the yum and rpm man pages, and
> gaining some understanding of dependencies.
_And_ a crystal ball to anticipate uncoordinated future changes by different
parties in a single namespace and file tree. The only ways this can be solved
is to either have a single repository where nothing is excluded by policy and
names and files are coordinated, or to delegate out package and file namespace
to repositories that can't coordinate to keep them from conflicting. Neither of
these seem very likely to happen.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
