Correct. But anyone who has been to a forum knows that there are so many things users want to compile. And as long as post-install-installing the packages from the nifty menu didn't work because: - Broken autorun script on fc2 cd's - fc2 system-config-packages was really borked anyway - all it did was to say "please insert CD" - when i in reallity was inserted. Is this fixed in fc3? I cant test, cus' i only have the NFS install images... Idealy, one should have a metapackage called "dev-tools" (or something like that) in yum, which would "depend" on having yum, make, etc., a "x-devel", a "gnome-devel" and a "kde-devel" package. Which would make it really simple to post-installation install it if needed. fre, 01.10.2004 kl. 01.16 skrev Sindre Pedersen Bjordal: > Fedora Core can't base it's settings on some third party driver. > > And besides, NVIDIA drivers doesn't have to require you to compile > anything. Users should use the rpms from http://rpm.livna.org for an > easier install and much easier update when there's a new driver > released. > > tor, 30,.09.2004 kl. 17.32 -0400, skrev Jeff Spaleta: > > On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 21:28:24 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis > > <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I see the problem. All those users of the nvidia driver will have > > > problems to build the kernel module. And what will they search for to > > > solve the problem: a kernel-source(code) rpm that is will not be part of > > > FC3 (as it seems). > > > > Fact: All those users who install fedora via the default "Desktop > > Install" option > > don't get the build tools to compile nvidia drivers as it is. Shall > > we pollute the default install to include all the development packages > > and build tools are there just in case someone wants to build > > something from source? > > > > The point is, as a packaging policy, the commonly required buildtools > > are not explicitly stated as buildrequirements for most src packages, > > nor for -devel binary packages. Your going to have to come up with a > > pretty impressive argument to make a need to one specific -devel > > package require cpp explicitly when -devel packages currently in the > > distro do not explicitly require gcc or cpp. > > > > -jef"112 -devel packages from Core installed and none of them > > explicitly require gcc or cpp which should a kernel-module-devel > > package be different?"spaleta > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When the case above would be very common, you can make the > > > > header-package part of the base-system but without requiring it > > > > explicitly. So it can be disabled on minimal installations. > > > > > > Don't understand this. How to solve the problem with updated kernels and > > > the needed headers for those? Add them all to one package and update > > > this every time a kernel-update is released -- this will be a big > > > package after some kernel-updates... > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > -- > > > fedora-devel-list mailing list > > > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list > > > > >
