Am Sonntag, den 01.01.2006, 00:41 -0800 schrieb Michael A. Peters: > On Sat, 2005-12-31 at 19:31 +0100, Axel Thimm 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. > > > > 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. I can't remember exactly, but wasn't that in a separate sub-repo and/or for a distribution that was not maintained anymore by Red Hat? > To be honest - I don't think in general that livna should replace extras > packages. I agree -- IMHO audacity in livna should be renamed to audacity-mp3 (or something else, no better idea atm) and conflict with audacity from extras. That way people can uninstall audacity from extras and manually install the version from livna if they want to (maybe it also works with some obsolete-magic, but I don't think so and did not try). Michael, could you file a bug in livna's bugzilla? tia -- Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
