[Yum] concern

[Karsten Jeppesen]

On Apr 1, 2005, at 13:33, seth vidal wrote:

>
>> sorry to hear that.
>>
>
> I guess i'm just confused what you would have me do.
>
> Relying on the headers is not going to work.
>
>

I don't think I mentioned headers. I must admit that I still include 
them in my repositories to allow the user to update yum itself, but 
that is outside this scope.
I use xml in a number of other contexts so I agree that xml is a valid 
solution to a number of problems. Just - it created one here.
As I said: I see a problem. I didn't say: here is what you should do.

I don't think your argument about anaconda holds any kind of water. I 
can wipe the disk any time too. I wouldn't need yum then. The idea was 
to see if yum could be used to overcome the distribution barrier in a 
live environment. And unfortunately - it couldn't.

So what to do about it....
Well - ask me anything about parallel processing, mobo development, 
open firmware, networking or kernel issues and I can most likely answer 
you. Python? Not my language yet.
If yum had been coded in C I would say - link it statically to make it 
self contained. Very likely we would then have other problems.

Python like so many other languages solve these problems by being cross 
platform, or so they say. Like asm, C and any other language it is 
cross platform ..... given enough support.

You found yourself that possibly the xml passing could be done 
statically ( not using libxml ). I thought of that. The problem with 
libxml is that it sucks in this context. It depends on to many other 
things. LibC for one.

Granted - updating from one distribution (more correctly probably: 
major revision) to the next is the most demanding attempt - because the 
developer never intended that. Or at least it seems so.
I am not picking at YDL here - they follow FC.

So I was more looking for: yes or no to that you see the problem and  - 
well - then we will have to think for a while. Maybe an idea will pop 
up.


Karsten