[Yum-devel] post 3.2.0 things to think about
seth vidal
skvidal at linux.duke.edu
Fri May 4 06:55:03 UTC 2007
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 08:33 +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
> Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 May 2007, Michael E Brown wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 05:11:46PM -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 09:18 +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> * yum list vendors
> >>>> List install packages and the rpm vendors, there have been a
> >>>> lot of
> >>>> discussions on the EPEL list, about repotag as a way to locate the
> >>>> source of the packages, because the basic packages tools like yum
> >>>> don't show it in a simple way.
> >>>
> >>> Can't repoquery do this?
> >
> > Sure it can but...
> >
> >> I think the point there is that we want to list the vendor at all times
> >> whenever we display the package name.
> >>
> >> The example given was something like this:
> >>
> >> core os package: foo-1.0-1.fc6.i386.rpm files: /bin/file1, /bin/file2
> >> evil repo package: foo-1.1-1.fc6.i386.rpm files: /bin/file1, /bin/file2,
> >> /bin/file3
> >> good repo package: bar-1.0-1.fc6.i386.rpm files: /bin/file3, /bin/file4
> >>
> >>
> >> user does:
> >> 1) install system
> >> 2) configure evil repo
> >> 3) yum upgrade (upgrades foo)
> >> 4) configure good repo
> >> 5) yum install bar
> >> WTF?! Why does the #!@#$@ "bar" package in "good" repo conflict with
> >> my BASE OS package "foo"??? Dont they even test this stuff?
> >>
> >> The user then proceeds to berate admin of good repo, even though it was
> >> actually evil repo's fault.
> >>
> >> If, when you gave the conflict message ("/bin/file3 from package foo
> >> conflicts with /bin/file3 from package bar"), you also mentioned the
> >> vendor, that might allevate some problems. ("/bin/file3 from package
> >> foo, vendor 'evil repo' conflicts with file /bin/file3 from package bar,
> >> vendor 'goot repo'")
> >
> > Been reading the EPEL repotag flamewars I see :)
> >
> > And yes, I agree, dragging the vendor string out of the dark cave it's
> > been hiding in all these years would seem to be a good thing. It's
> > just that screen estate is already a scarce resource, there's no room
> > on 80char terminal to put the potentially lengthy vendor string into,
> > unless per-package info is split on two lines.
> This is why i think something like yum list vendors could be nice, i
> could show something like this
>
> foo-1.0-1.fc7.i386 Vendor X
> bar-1.0-2.fc7.noarch Vendor Y
is there a sensible situation when a single repo will have more than one
vendor contributing the same package name/arch?
or are you meaning only for installed pkgs?
If it is for installed pkgs we'd almost be better off recording the repo
a package was installed FROM elsewhere.
-sv
More information about the Yum-devel
mailing list