On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:01 PM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Mark <markg85@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I don't know if i'm gonna put that effort in it. I don't like >> packagekit that much > > if people don't make the effort, then it won't be changed. You made > the effort to write your original post. You made the effort to reply. > If you are going to bother writing anything at all, the least I can do > is take the time to make the effort to make sure you are writing to > the write place to have an impact. My impact attempts in packages (nautilus with the thumbnails and a few others) have till this day gone without any result. So forgive me for not thinking that i'm making any impact at all.. not even a small dent. > >> It's in the spec file defined as "Name: <<the name>>" > packagename-version-release.arch packagename is <<the name>> the > information is there its just not the bolded part. >> I see 2 identical names and descriptions just a different architecture > 64bit system. They are not duplicates. How does PK know if you want > the 32bit or the 64bit version of a package? well.. i have the 64 bit os so install and show the 64 bit packages that are available in 64 bit. if not then show me 32 bit (with a notice that 64 bit is not available) > >> I don't have anything called: "Authorizations" in the >> System->Administration menu. > > my mistake System->Preference->System->Authorizations Found it and changed the policy. But i really don't like that i need to change things like that. that just makes me think: turn it off. (like i do with selinux as well because it gives me messages when i play a flash video. But that's another topic (where i also tried to make an impact which also failed) > >> I don't want nor need that kind of power. (nice to have though) the >> default policies should just be right in a released "stable" product >> (fedora 10) if they aren't then it's beta/rc and doesn't belong here, > > I don't think your personal preference nor mine gets to define the > 'right' defaults. Defaults are a matter of reasoned discussion and > must balance several factors. There is an argument to be made that > the one time importing of a repository key into the rpm keyring is a > sensitive enough action and infrequent enough to require an > administrator's authorization as a default policy. > In my opinion the default policies should be set in a way that you can do normal thing (using apps) without any messages. you get them when a app is gonna change something on the system. > -jef > Mark -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
