Matthew Miller (mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 05:21:57PM -0400, Christian Schaller wrote: > > I assume it might breach some packaging policy, but why not have a > > 'desktop' rpm which requires all other packages we consider part of the > > desktop for a given release? That way when we add new applications like > > this we just add it as a dependency of the desktop package? > > I can't actually find or recall such a policy. I looked, but the last I > could find was a 2009 conversation which ended in the comps format being > rewritten, which solved the specific problem without answering the general > question. > > We certainly do have some "meta-packages" like that -- for example from the > top of my head, xorg-x11-drivers, and good 'ol redhat-lsb. Your idea seems > to fit along the same lines as redhat-lsb. > > If we do this, does the %packages list for the spin just become that one > file? The goal was to turn on persistent groups in yum, so if you install the gnome-desktop group, then on upgrade, it upgrades to the current definition of that group. It's worth testing why this isn't working - I mentioned that fedup doesn't use yum, but it *does* use it to determine what to download, so it should be working there. Bill -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
