Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 31, 2005 at 05:17:02PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: >> On Sat, 2005-12-31 at 11:49 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: >> Er, or just volunteer to package mythtv for livna? > >That is the second time this suggestion comes up in this thread. What >makes livna and ATrpms different, or say livna preferable to ATrpms in >this context? At the beginning of this thread some people posted about >livna replacing packages just as well. The fact that Livna would not pull in a bunch of rpms that, for instance myth TV does not need. The last time I tried to install a myth box from ATrpms it wanted to replace yum. NO, I do not want the ATrpm version of yum installed. Myth does not need it. I only want the packages NECESSARY for myth to work installed. IIRC, I thought I could bump my version of yum to override it but upon inspection there was some specific tag that required the use of the ATrpms version. In addition I seem to remember the dep-solver pulling in some other equally unnecessary packages but I cannot remember which ones. I use a custom version of yum that I build so that I can serve up the yum.conf files from a web server. Why would I want to replace my version of yum with ATrpms? If ATrpm's deps were sane this would not be a problem but the last time I looked they are not. >Just for the note: Fedora itself, when it wasn't merged with RHL (aka >fedora.us) decided to have vendor packages replaced. packages like >shadow-utils or rpm itself. IIRC only on a VERY limited basis. If you are referring to the rpm upgrade for RHL 8.0, as far as I am concerned NOT upgrading was a mistake on Red Hat's part. That upgrade made the system usable and the decision to do that was very controversial. Disclaimer: I have not actually looked at this in approx 6 months. If things have changed then that is good and I would appreciate being corrected. I really do appreciate the work 3rd party repos do. I used to use Dag's repo quite frequently and I would gladly use ATrpms if the deps were not so intrusive. Regards, Tom Diehl tdiehl@xxxxxxxxxxxx Spamtrap address mtd123@xxxxxxxxxxxx -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
