Re: [Fedora-config-list] Importance of install/remove/update by group interface

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 17:17, David Farning wrote:
> I wondering about the importance of the install/remove/update by group
> interface in a yumified -packages.
> 
> Implementing the install/remove/update by package interface for yum is
> pretty straight forward.  The group interface is proving much more
> difficult.  The problem lies in the fact that comps and rhpl.comps use
> rpmheaders while yum works with nevral to keep track of the packages.

The group interface is absolutely *crucial* to the usability of the
tool.  Having 1500 packages ungrouped in any sort of sane, scalable
mechanism (and without regard for trimming to just leaf packages instead
of listing everything libgal that's a dependency of something ;) is a
nitemare.

> The two choices I see are:
> 1.  The nevral could be converted into a list of rpmheaders that are
> passed to comps.  That is pretty costly.  In addition it is kludgy.
> 
> 2.  The comps stuff could be rewritten to utilize nevral.
> 
> Any better suggestions would be appreciated.

To be honest, trying to kludge either into working is going to lead to a
complete lack of maintainability, IMHO.  Realistically, both the yum
side of things and the redhat-config-packages side of things need to
move towards using the New Improved RPM Metadata that's being
discussed/developed. 

Brent and I sat down and cleaned up/refined the design spec we did six
months ago for redhat-config-packages and tried to also update it a bit
to take into account some of the changes since then.  Hopefully we'll
finish getting this written up and sent out by the beginning of next
week.  

The short summary is that I think that starting with just the existing
code is going to  make things far more painful than they should be. 
Stepping back and looking at the big picture and going from there
instead of trying to hijack in things that were never intended to exist
is the wrong approach.  Also, I would like to move things to where we
don't have four different tools for the same basic thing and can have it
as consolidated into one tool as much as possible.  I'd far rather get
things done right, even if it takes longer, than continue the hacks like
I've been doing thus far :)

Cheers,

Jeremy




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]