[CentOS] Centosplus & CentOS Extras, Enlarge your tent

Craig White craigwhite at azapple.com
Sat Mar 11 17:18:14 UTC 2006

On Sat, 2006-03-11 at 09:01 -0800, Jim Smith wrote:
> --- Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com> wrote:
> > I am not completely sure that I agree with the above. Sometimes you
> > have to break eggs to cook them. Some packaging requires updated
> base
> > modules to function...unfortunate but true. If 'upstream' refuses
> to update
> > certain base packages, then they might have to be replaced by a
> > repo to get other packages installed...you takes your chances. Good
> luck
> > getting things like mythtv installed without updating some of the
> 'core'
> > packages...which is why I think (rather unfairly), Axel Thimms gets
> > a lot of heat for his repo...because he is actually making edge
> > packages work and sometimes he has to break eggs.
> Broken eggs? A good example is on the centos list
> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2006-March/020471.html
> That is a SURE lot of eggs to break for just mythtv.
why don't you set up mythtv and see for yourself what it entails - get
back to me if you can do it without enabling Axel's repository.

I saw your email and saw the whine - seemed to me to be a user not
knowing what he was doing and just adding everything.
> > I think the larger issue between Fedora repositories was
> > standardization of naming that provided a logical system for one
> repository to
> > evaluate its versioning against another and that seems to have
> gotten worked
> > out in FC-4 repos.
> > ----
> > > 
> > > Craig, where is the KDE-Redhat  repo, I'm not a fan of KDE but if
> > > they have a newer SAMBA, I'll see whether it can quiten the logs.
> > ----
> > kde-redhat.sourceforge.net
> Arhh i recognize that repo as one of Axel Thims. I wouldn't touch
> anything from ATRMS/kde-redhat.sourceforge.net with a barge pole.
> On the subject of Fedora since i haven't touched FC4, they may have
> ironed out the "repository hell" situation.
#1 kde-redhat.sourceforge.net (kde-redhat.repo) != atrpms  If you don't
know the difference, don't use either.

#2 whether you would touch a repo with a barge pole is an interesting
commentary since you did, couldn't figure out what you had done and
needed help cleaning it up...it makes sense that you do not venture into
repositories without the tools to clean up the mess that you make. My
guess is that you probably enabled something like atrpms 'testing' or
'unstable' repositories and your wounds were entirely self-inflicted.

#3 'repository hell' situation that you characterize...I would have
never ascribed that characterization to issues between various
repositories that existed with FC-3 - the solution was pretty clear, use
either livna or dag/dries/freshrpms/atrpms - I always chose the
latter...their packaging was better, fresher, more compatible.


More information about the CentOS mailing list