On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 14:29:05 -0400, seth vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Yes - that's a file dep - that's how they work. I'm not a big fan of > them, either. > > If you'd like to lead a crusade to get rid of them I'll happily follow > but seeing as I've tried it twice I'm not going to lead another one :) Right now I am cla only and not in a good position to lead packaging initiatives. (I want to eventually be a packager, but the code I have a particular interest in packaging is written in java which I not that familiar with and needs to have have copyrighted images scrubbed and will still need to be looked at further because it is based on a boardgame.) I don't think finding references to files and changing the providing packages to explicitly provide them would be all that hard. While this would speed up yum in some cases I am not sure this is really the right approach. Someone really needs to think about how provides/requires should be used and how multilib will interact with this. I suspect this wouldn't be a high priority initiative. The benefits would be faster yum and rpm (since filelist checks for requirements could be skipped) and perhaps a better way to figure out which i386 packages should be included in the x86_64 repo. -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
