Including mailing list for wider/more inputs. >> I'm thinking of another approach. How about adding "open-vm-tools" >> to "standard" group and "open-vm-tools-desktop" to "base-x" group? >> Then, I will not have to modify so many installation environments >> (patches attached). In future, we could make these packages >> conditional by modifying Anaconda to support something like >> following. > Assorted people on the list didn't like this idea, so I'd prefer > not to go that route. As well: >> <packagereq type="conditional" requiredvirtualization="vmware">open-vm-toolspackagereq> > ... that's not going to happen. We want to eliminate these > conditionals wherever possible - we're not going to add new ones. Bill and I are discussing following two approaches for including open-vm-tools in Fedora: 1. Create two new groups, 'virt-agents' with 'open-vm-tools' and 'virt-agents-x' with 'open-vm-tools-desktop'. Add 'virt-agents' group to X/non-X environments and add 'virt-agents-x' group to X environments. 2. Add 'open-vm-tools' to 'standard' group and add 'open-vm-tools-desktop' to 'base-x' group. Last time when I discussed this, people did not like adding stuff to 'core', but there was a suggestion to put it in 'standard'. Therefore, I would like to know what people think about approach #2. Does anyone have any comments/inputs for one approach over another? Thanks, Ravindra -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
