Re: Yet another frustration with Fedora package management

Hedayat Vatankhah <hedayat.fwd@xxxxxxxxx> · Sun, 04 Jan 2015 22:03:28 +0330



      Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
      on Sun, 04 Jan 2015 19:19:20 +0100:
    
      
      Am 04.01.2015 um 19:13 schrieb Hedayat Vatankhah:
      

      <...>

      DNF is using "/etc/dnf/dnf.conf" which is one reason more to
      finally rename it back to YUM when it starts to replace it instead
      demand users all over the world change working configs, but that's
      a different topic nobody cares about
      

      if other sofwtare like Packagekit ignore that global options of
      the package manager just file bugreport for them
      

      >>> I wonder if having a single packages.conf is THAT
      hard!!!
      

      for DNF, YUM, Packagekit and what not else?
      

      surely, the same way hard to just proceed the configuration of
      yum.conf, they all would needed to be changed
      

    I'm fine with using yum.conf if everybody respects it, but I didn't
    propose it because:

    1) There are some options in yum.conf that DNF/PK doesn't recognize

    2) DNF has some specific options in dnf.conf which yum doesn't
    support

    3) PK/GNOME Software have ... well I'm yet to completely discover
    but at least they have some options controlled by gsettings! and
    some in /etc/PackageKit/ which is completely unique to itself!

    
    So, I thought that maybe every package *likes* to have its specific
    settings method; and therefore I proposed to have a global
    configuration which configures main package manager policy.

    
    Regards,

    Hedayat

  
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct