On Sun 05 Jan 2003, Buchan Milne wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Ibukun Olumuyiwa wrote:
>
> >
> > > On Wed, 2003-01-01 at 21:39, Ibukun Olumuyiwa wrote:
>
> > >> Anyways...and I hope the Mozilla maintainer(s) take note of this: The
> > >> dependencies in that rpm need to be fixed. I'm not sure which it is,
> > >> whether glibc or GTK, but upgrading both of those packages fixed the
> > >> problem for me. There's no reason why any upgrade should fail if all
> > >> dependencies are correctly resolved.
> > >>
> >
> > I don't think you read my post completely. The problem is not with urpmi.
> > The problem is with the mozilla rpm itself. The rpm needs to be updated
> > with new dependencies. That's exactly what I'm ranting about.
> >
>
> The dependencies are fine for the distribution it is intended for. It is
> virtually impossible to keep all packages perfect for all distributions,
> heck, it's difficult just keeping some packages working well on just the
> supported distros. Is it really worthwhile (financially) to keep people
> who are (against recommendations) runnning some unknown mismatch of
> packages that only semi-resembles any Mandrake release?
>
> Rebuild the SRPM on your system, and then post back. Dynamic (ie output
> from ldd) dependencies are supposed to do this, assuming authors bump the
> major version o f their libraries when they break something. So go file a
> bug in Gnome bugzilla (or wherever best) about it if your own build works.
> Of course, you're on your own building the SRPM ...
>
> Buchan
>
First, I don't have a problem. I know how to find the correct missing
packages and upgrade.
Secondly, I think an attitude like this defeats the purpose of an open
source operating system. What I mean is this: yes, I agree it's too much
work trying to make sure all dependencies for previous versions are
correct (although I don't believe keeping track of dependencies from 9.0
to 9.1 cooker is too much). However, when such dependencies are actually
discovered, they should be fixed, not discarded with the excuse of this
being a beta distribution. I don't think it takes that much work to update
an RPM's dependencies. Otherwise there's no point having people out
there test the packages put in the cooker: you might as well close the
cooker list and do everything behind closed doors.
My beef wasn't with the fact that not every dependency is being tracked. I
know it takes time, money and resources to do that. I just don't like
attitudes that sort of defeat the purpose of having a Cooker distribution
and an associated mailing list available to the public.
--
| /*\
Ibukun Olumuyiwa | \ / Join the ASCII Ribbon Campaign
http://xcomputerman.com | X against HTML mail today!
| / \
