Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>> I have repeatedly asked people to take this conversation away from
>>> this list. Is there really any point you are trying to make by
>>> carrying on ?
>>>
>>> its not that hard to just post a follow up on another list, both you
>>> and rex are on the epel and the rpmforge lists. how about pick one and
>>> post the follow up's there ?
>> There is a distribution-related issue here whether you care to
>> acknowledge it or not - and the solution isn't going to be to wait until
>> the whole world decides on only one version of everything. Incompatible
>> repositories should be allowed/encouraged to exist and we need a way to
>> deal with them reasonably.
>>
>
> THIS IS NOT A CENTOS ISSUE ... IT NEVER WILL BE A CENTOS ISSUE
[...]
> Anything that is not in the upstream distro (or in CentOSPlus or
> CentOSExtras repos or another repo we add) IS NOT A CENTOS issue.
[...]
> WHY OH WHY OH WHY
Did you miss my point that _exactly_ the same problem occurs when you
load (and need) a kernel from centosplus and it is implicitly obsoleted
if a newer version number appears on a kernel that won't work for you in
a different repository that you have enabled. This is a centos tool
issue. I know there is an ugly workaround if you know a lot of details
and want to defeat way the tools are supposed to be handling things for
you automatically, but it is not at all elegant like the rest of Centos.
Solve the <any newer version from any repo obsoletes any potentially
different package from a different repo> in a general way and then not
only does the impossible task of making the world code-compatible go
away, but then we can easily take advantage of different/better packages
in additional repos like centosplus.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com