-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Michael Schwendt wrote:
| Extras should at most depend on Core, but not on Alternatives.
Okay, then, we need new nomenclature. Say I want the newest Galeon, which (hypothetically) doesn't support the FC-shipped Mozilla but needs FC-moz++ (as was the case for RedHat 9). On my RH9 boxes, I used Dag's galeon+mozilla packages.
Now, how would you suggest handling that situation? What names would apply to the repositories where said packages reside? | | As soon as you update software which is in Core or Extras, you don't play | well with the current scheme, and all your software would be "Testing | Alternatives". |
Hmmm. Not quite right, IMHO. Maybe "Unsupported" or something like that? Again, taking the Dag moz+gal situation, I wouldn't label them as "testing". If Galeon fits in to the "extras" category, but I wanted the updated build and needed to upgrade Mozilla (a Core package), how would you propose working out such a situation? Or are any users of such packages strictly off the RedHat Ranch?
- -- - ---------- Doug Stewart Systems Administrator/Web Applications Developer Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Labs dstewart@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE/sPkMN50Q8DVvcvkRApJTAJ47XoT6n+Bu7ZzLwAPdkzkax8AY6QCfcVOM MlBSZLveYZ7PsyLDzYWfN1E= =pF4I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
