On Fri, 2005-01-28 at 12:30 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:34:09 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > Technically, I don't see any need for apt to adopt yum's repodata > > format. Politically, this requirement is introduced by RH not wanting to > > add apt-repositories and fedora.us apparently being unable to set up > > complete repositories. > > Unless I'm misinformed, fedora.us even provides an apt-repository for > pre-extras. What do you mean with "unable to set up complete > repositories"? SRPMS apt-repositories are missing for pre-extras. This renders "apt-get source" and "apt-get build-dep" non-applicable to fedora.us hosted apt-repositories and therefore voids at least these aspects where apt is superior to yum. I had asked Warren Togami to add them on PM and he answered: "There is little good reason to do so. Trying to limit the size of that repository because many mirror administrators see it as redundant." This is not true, SRPMS apt-repositories are not redundant. Not having them implies loss of functionality to apt. As Fedora.US had supplied SRPMS apt-repositories for FC < 3, omitting them for pre-extras also means a regression in functionality of fedora.us having been introduced with the switch from FE2 to pre- extras/FE3. Ralf
