On Monday 29 November 2004 19:07, Axel Thimm wrote: > Or let me rephrase the problem, why do some people insist that > replacing packages is bad? I used to be a systems programmer, a member of a team responsible for maintain the system software on multisquillion dollar IBM mainframes. One of the things I learned there is that every step from the standard way of doing things brings more headaches. Whenever we customised IBM's software (and we did), we needed a plan to ensure a smooth transition to the next IBM release. Whenever we installed software from another vendor (and we did), we needed a plan to ensure that the different sets of software worked together smoothly, and to be sure we could update smoothly to the next releases of each. There is a reason RH highlights that you cannot upgrade a system with Ximian's Gnome packages in place: Ximian's packages are different (why else would anyone want them) and conflict with what RH provides. I expect no less. If I want to package software for RHEL or Fedora Core I will target a specific environment, most probably a standard install with no third-party extras. What else _can_ I do? Unless I'm enhancing one of those extras of course. It's up to administrators (often the users) to ensure that they don't have conflicting packages, of they do, to have a plan to work around the difficulties that will arise. I will, of course, expect you to read the documentation I provide, before installing and maybe before acquiring the sotware. -- Cheers John
