Axel Thimm schrieb: > On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 02:43:31PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> On 21.12.2006 14:24, Axel Thimm wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 02:10:18PM +0100, Axel Thimm wrote: >>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 08:55:25PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >>>>> Hey all, I've just added a draft proposal for limiting file dependencies >>>>> in packages. It's a "should" recommendation at this point. >>>>> http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/FileDeps >>>>> = File Deps Guideline = >>>>> == Problem == >>>> How often does this problem really occur? I just checked core's x86_64 >>>> packages and there are exactly 12 files in such dependencies >>>> affecting 18 packages out of 2422 (that's 0.7%): >>> And the same metrics for extras: 26 files required by 27 packages out >>> of 3660 packages: >>> That's again 0.7%, so the combined Fedora is at 0.7%, too. >> Well, my initial calculations found 32 file based deps outside of "/etc >> {/usr,}/{s,}bin/" in Extras 6 x64 ;-) Just to note, I mentioned that >> when I started the whole mess after skvidal poked me about it. See >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2006-December/msg00077.html > But then it was known that this is negligible, "negligible" IMHO is debatable, but yes, it's not a big problem (currently). And just to clarify: I just started to look into it because skvidal poked me about it. I had no interest in it myself and after the initial research I did te thing rolled on its own. > why does it escalate > to become even a proposal for guidelines? To avoid that there get more of those added in the future? > Do we care that yum fetches > the filelists every 140 package updates? If it can be avoided easiy: yes. There is also the OLPC hardware that seems to be quite slow and will probably take ages to resolve such a dep. We should keep that in mind, too. CU thl -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
