On Sat, 22 May 2004, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> G. meta-packages. e.g. have a package x-terminal-client that depends
> on some set of other packages, provides certain config files,
> etc.
>
> The obvious problem is that the gdm package provides
> gdm.conf, so how does a meta-package install a different
> gdm.conf. If every important daemon/feature supported a
> conf.d with override files in it, that might answer the
> question, but sadly that isn't the norm.
>
> H. Some sort of RPM changes. Presumably we could make RPM smart
> about this problem in some way. I don't have concrete ideas.
>
>Obviously, this is far from fully thought-out at this point, I'm just
>trying to start the thread. It looks pretty likely to me that our
>solution will be a pragmatic compromise that isn't quite ideal. But
>which compromise is the best one?
>
I will say:
Here, here! This is definately would be very useful. I think it will
take a bit of many of the items you have listed above, and should be
approached also in a systematic way.
FC3 -- documentation (complete by FC6)
FC4 -- breaking RPMS more into seperate
executables
bare-essentials, but requires some sort of config.
documentation
configuration
bare-config, specific1-config, specific2-config, etc
all provide package-config which is required by bare
(complete by FC7)
FC5 -- better metapackage groupings (complete by FC8)
--
Stephen John Smoogen smoogen@xxxxxxxx
Los Alamos National Lab CCN-5 Sched 5/40 PH: 4-0645
Ta-03 SM-1498 MailStop B255 DP 10S Los Alamos, NM 87545
-- You should consider any operational computer to be a security problem --
