On Thursday 29 September 2005 23:31, seth vidal wrote:
> I'm not sure any solution will match up to
> everyone's concept of 'correct'.
I'll admit I haven't read through all the proposals, but, I'll throw out
a couple of thoughts. I actually have a similar packaging scenario
with multiple Pythons on the system. The best method I have devised is
usage of a base package name that Requires a version-specific package
name.
In the case of Python it would be:
python-foo Requires python24-foo. Where python-foo would essentially be
an empty placeholder. Subsequent upgrades to python-foo could then
Require python25-foo. While this doesn't guarantee removal of
python24-foo, that's okay. Because as soon as user does remove
python24, then all python24-* packages go into lala land with a "yum
remove".
A potential similar mapping could be made with kernels and
kernel-modules:
kernel-module-widget Requires kernel-module-widget-%{kver}. Then
subsequent upgrades to kernel-module-widget can change that Requires
bringing with it the new kernel-module-widget-%{kver}. When user
removes the old kernel, then the old kernel-module-widget-%{kver} will
leave with it.
Others probably have thought of the same... but, it doesn't really
require that much magic and no changes to yum are required. I'd like
to know if there are any holes in the logic, before I get too far with
my Python stuff... :P
--
-jeff
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
