Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
And if you think it's a matter of patching the package, note that for
any GNOME packages you'll find in Fedora for which there are patches,
you'll find those same patches/functionality being upstreamed.
I think there is really a better approach to this, but it doesn't mesh
all that well with RPM capabilities. That is, for every package or
package group where there is more than one commonly desired
configuration, there should be multiple configuration packages where the
last one installed wins, conceptually similar to the way the
caching-nameserver package is just a different configuration for bind.
Then you could have a gnome-cluttered package for people who like
leaving trails of open windows splattered all over the screen and
gnome-clean for people who don't.
I don't think rpm packages are the right way to do this. There might be
some interesting way to extend sabayon to be a "configuration package
tool", though. That would be highly experimental and is likely
something that needs some thought and some work as a separate project
for a while.
The point is that an end user shouldn't need to know the difference, or
that certain configuration settings come included in certain RPMs and
are somehow magical compared to other settings. I think it is somewhat
of a mistake to embed them with programs in the first place and it would
be much cleaner to install the configurations as the actual package (and
the one you know about) with the necessary programs pulled in as
dependencies. Pre-yum, this would have been a nightmare, but now it
would make perfect sense to have descriptively-named configuration
packages with many alternatives that pull in whatever programs might be
needed and installs the configuration you want, regardless of how
upstream or anyone else felt about the defaults.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
