On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 02:15:59PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>> "JK" == Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > JK> Or, instead of introducing the insanity of uname-r in name, we can > JK> put effort into adjusting rpm and yum to handle this sort of > JK> package situation correctly. > > It seems like what we really need is some sort of two-dimensional > versioning. I guess everyone will just laugh at me for suggesting it, I'm not, that's exactly the issue here. > but for a plugin/module "foo" having version "M" which works with > "packageA" version "N", just call it "packageA-module-foo-M,N", teach > the depsolvers how to deal with it, and get on with life. That can take half a decade, so we should find a solution for now and lobby with our experiences for rpmng's design. This is off-topic, but I really thing that at some time in the future our group could start thinking about setting up specifications for a new package manager trying to learn from rpm's deficiencies and trying to unearth a project for that. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpcf055x3Ka5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
