Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 05:12:06PM -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> But it would be even better if we could live with the assumption that repos
>> will have incompatibilities, whether accidental or intentional. Then it
>> would become a choice of which to install and things wouldn't break when
>> somewhere else updates first. Then you could focus on making your versions
>> better instead of compatible - and the politics wouldn't matter.
>
> Sorry, that's not possible. Just to give an example: For some reason
> you favour repo A and make it trump over repo B. Both repos ship
> libfoo and repo B ships also appbaz needing libfoo with a couple more
> configure options turned on.
>
> No smart package manager in the world will detect this breakage. One
> could strat thinking about stricter dependencies etc. but there will
> always be real-world scenarios like the above spoiling your master
> plan.
How much more information would rpm/yum need to store and consider in
order to understand that they should never overwrite a package from one
repository with one from a different repository without explicit
instructions? Permitting explicit repository-specific dependencies would
be nice too, although that could be worked around given the ability to
control the initial repo for a package and an understanding that no
other repo's version should replace it without permission even if it has
the same name and a higher version number.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com