Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 03:28:34PM -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > I think protectbase by default is a particularly bad idea for a > > number of reasons. But if i understand the original poster > > correctly, the problem he wants solved is a way to easily update > > packages in a way that recognizes from where installed packages were > > originally installed from after selectively install packages from a > > number of different vendors. I don't see a good solution to this > > problem since the rpmdb doesn't keep track of this sort of > > information. The closest thing that can be used to aid this sort of > > update is gpg signatures. > I agree, this is a different problem at all. But even then I would > reconsider. Assume package foo exiting at ATrpms at FC<N> time, and > then it makes it into FC<N+1> core. You wouldn't want to exclude the > upgrade path to another repo. Also some packages may be dropped by FC > like pine was, and it may reappear in another repo. Again, you'd like > to have upgrade paths not accidentially broken due to vendor/origin > lock mechanisms. > > I think these idioms are trying to cure something at the wrong > end. I'd ask the following: > > o What needs to be fixed? PEBCAK: Don't just "upgrade all" from external repositories, "upgrade the-package" only. If there are dependencies that must be satisfied from the external repo, it pulls them in; if not, nothing is changed. If standard packages are overwritten, well... Perhaps an easy way of telling yum to pull from a (disabled, or marked external in some other way and thus not considered by default) repository would solve most of the problem? -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
