Re: portage vs yum

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Oh, I didn't know about that tool. But why do you have to do that by hand? It
> should be automatic. Yum or apt won't update a library without also updating
> the applications which depend on it to versions built against the correct
> library.

IIRC, whereas Yum and other binary-based systems such as APT track literal
libraries (e.g., "libfoo.so.42(ABI_TAG)"), Portage only tracks per-package
dependencies; so when you update one package it still notes that you have
the dependent package installed. (I'm not too familiar with Portage internals
though; so I could very well be completely pulling this out of my butt. ^_^)

> I don't know why I couldn't remember the specific term, I knew it of
> course. :-) But ebuilds, specfiles etc. are all "recipes". ;-)

Technicalities of word choice - nothing more. :)
-- 
Peter Gordon (codergeek42)
This message was sent through a webmail
    interface, and thus not signed.

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux