On 26/03/2008, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Jonathan Underwood (jonathan.underwood@xxxxxxxxx) said: > > > > Because it's changing 500 packages, and you can't do the replacement > > > sanely in RPM anyway. > > > > Surely a large proportion of those 500 packages will be rebuilt in the > > F-10 release cycle anyway? However, I don't understand the second > > point you make there? > > > To do a full /sbin -> /bin migration, you'd need to: > > 1) Rebuild all packages to change paths > 2) Maintain a list of things that are commonly referenced by third-party/local > scripts by path > 3) Build a package that provides those symlinks > Doesn't step 3 render step 2 redundant? > I fail to see how this is more efficient than just modifying $PATH. (Actually > I fail to see what horribly necessary commands are causing this to be a > big issue, but that's beside the point.) > > You can't just symlink /sbin to /bin, because that will blow up RPM > very badly. > Why's that? Could/should rpm not be fixed? J. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
