[CentOS-devel] [packagers] Re: wine 1.2 packages
dag at wieers.com
Thu Aug 12 10:56:56 UTC 2010
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010, Yury V. Zaytsev wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 11:52 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
>> (flex and make come to mind, there were a few others)
> Latest autotools, flex / bison, static packages for unsatisfiable
> dependencies such as curl, qt etc. All of this has no place in the
> standard base repository.
>> It could be:
>> What do people think ?
> From the aestetical point of view what bothers be is that rf is just 2
> characters, while the rest is 3 characters long :-)
But on the upside, you shouldn't see those on "normal" systems :-)
Which reminds me that I also did the proposal of creating an "extras"
.rf. rpmforge stable (additional packages)
.rfb. rpmforge buildtools (buildtools, not required)
.rft. rpmforge testing (test stuff, no guarantee)
.rfx. rpmforge extras (packages replacing base)
Not sure if rfx/extras is a good name for that repository.
If we decide to do this, I guess we should start identifying those
packages that replace base, or require packages that replace base.
-- dag wieers, dag at wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
More information about the CentOS-devel