>>>>> "AT" == Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: AT> Maybe it's better to avoid atrpms at all then, as its bar will AT> probably assume that you are using foo from the same source? AT> Perhaps foo in core is being replaced just to add the AT> functionality that bar needs? Possibly. In my case I need a few kernel modules (ipw2200 for one), and I certainly don't want all the rest that atrpms tries to replace. Anyway, package dependencies are supposed to handle the issue you're describing. If not, the package dependencies are wrong. AT> It isn't as black or white as it seems. I've had enough bug AT> reports on using apt and smart with priorities/weights to strongly AT> advise against their use (not apt/smart's, but their weighing AT> mechanisms). AT> And if you don't trust repo X to replace package Y, then why trust AT> it to offer package Z? Better drop repo X, if you feel AT> uncomfortable. I would drop atrpms in an instant if anyone else provided those kernel modules. However, noone else does. Atrpms is only usable for me with a hefty exclude= line, and I'm seriously considering switching to include=. However, that would mean never again being able to check with yum whether atrpms provides a certain package. Perhaps the real solution is an option to let yum list ignore exlude= and include=. /Benny -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
