[CentOS] Re: Mixing RPMforge and EPEL (Was: EPEL repo)

Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
Thu Aug 2 07:04:05 UTC 2007


Petr "Qaxi" Klíma wrote:
> 
>>> Diversity adds a lot of value. If EPEL will be only repo nobody on 
>>> RHEL workstation can see/listen MP3, WMA, DVD playing, because of 
>>> interesting US software patent and millenium act law.
>>
>> That's not what I meant.  Obviously we need additional packages in 
>> other repositories and that will be true as long as there is any 
>> policy that might exclude any contribution to a centrally managed 
>> repository.  The question is, why do we need/want different versions 
>> of the same-named packages, or packages that provide different 
>> versions of the same files that can overwrite each other based on 
>> conditions we can't control? There probably is a good reason to want 
>> this - I just can't think of it right now.
>>
> That's easy:
> 
> (this is example, has no reflection to current state ...)
> 
> EPEL  provides xmms-1.2.10-1.i586.rpm    - but without MP3, WMA, AAC ...
> DAG   provides xmms-1.2.9-1.rf.i586.rpm  - with all those beasts
> ATRPM provides xmms-1.2.10-1.at.i586.rpm - with all those beasts
> 
> Which you installs? Who knows, probably EPEL ...
> 
> Solution?
> 
> Repo priorities and includes

But wouldn't it be easier if the packages had different names so you 
could just install the one(s) you want from the command line?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com




More information about the CentOS mailing list