On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 09:02:15AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > Meanwhile, new packaging for, say, nautilus which has > > Requires(missingok): gnome-vfs2-smb > > and a depsolver that tests RPMSENSE_MISSINGOK drop a sub-tree that > > is optional. > > > > I fail to see a mulberry bush, except in this loopy and endless fretting. > > > > Show me the mulberries *please*. > > > user goes from package-1.0-1.0 to package-1.1-1.0 which now had a > Requires(missingok): gnome-vfs2-smp. Fine; yum (for the sake of > argument) grabs gnome-vfs2-smp as well and everything is happy. > Now the user gets annoyed by the "bloat" and removes gnome-vfs2-smp. > Still fine. > > Then a security update comes out, package-1.1-1.1 and the user of course > upgrades to that. yum will *AGAIN* pull in gnome-vfs2-smp. User gets > really annoyed and considers this not-fine. > > Would there be a way to version the missingok such that it's a hint to > the depsolver to only solve the dep if the old package is matching the > versioning ? > Sounds to me like we should install gnome-vfs2-smb via comps.xml to provide it per default for new installs, but also let people de-install it. Then the remaining item is to look at updates. I think with good error messages and maybe some release notes this should be ok, not that much more rpm deps can solve for this situation. greetings, Florian La Roche
