On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 12:50 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > I would certainly concur with this. Without making a judgment as to > the value of having alien or other alternative packaging tools in the > repository.. I would agree that if we are going to be putting dpkg and > friends into the repository that they come configured by default to > only act as helpers for using Fedora as a (re)packaging host. > Enabling functionality beyond that should be relatively difficult to > enable if not disabled entirely at buildtime. There maybe some rather > clever unorthodox ways to make use of a fully capable dpkg in other > ways, but I don't want users accidental stumbling into those > situations just because they installed dpkg and followed a google'd > recipe article to have dpkg replace rpm on their Fedora system. I once installed FC2 by hand, using debian's rpm, to hot-convert said debian machine to Fedora. :) And I kept notes: http://www.haxxed.com/random/fedorainstall.txt Its actually the oldest surviving Fedora install I have, and is still in use. Its survived apt-rpm upgrades up to FC5 or so, and its been yum upgrades since then. And survived most of the hardware being replaced and a total re-purposing. It was originally a firewall box, but was replaced by a (Linux based) wireless router and re-purposed as an "HTPC"...
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
