On Thu, May 26, 2005 at 02:08:55PM -0700, Karsten Jeppesen wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote: > > On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 05:58:05PM -0700, Karsten Jeppesen wrote: > > > Regarding your question about Axel (atrpms): In my opinion > > > atrpms should be handled with care. If used incorrectly - it may > > > blow up your system. > > > > Not if you use at-stable which is the default setting.
> > > So it is possible to paint yourself into a corner revision wise. > > > My philosophy is: never use yum update while atrpms is > > > active. Only download what you need. > > > > Then you are left with broken dependencies. > Not necesarrily. You may just not have a working system. Well, that's no comfort, is it? ;) The packages are meant to be used in an ensemble, they are not meant to be used selectively. > As I described with the Alsa system. Axel it is not your fault. In > fact it has nothing to to with you at all. It is inherent in the rpm > structure. No, I disagree. The error is in selectively using repos. ATrpms offers libs and kmdls for alsa and other projects, as well as compatibility packages for some of them (when the major lib version has bumbed). As such ATrpms is designed to be fully compatible with the base system and some other cooperating repos as well. Once you start upgrading selectively with yum/smart etc. you are creating compatibility issues. Please don't do that and more importantly don't encourage others to do so! The bug reports hit ATrpms, and are difficult to diagnose. :( > > > An example is the Alsa system. If you use yum update the Alsa > > > system will be useless afterwards. Simply because the FC3 rpms > > > for Alsa are brainless. So you end up with atrpms Alsa system > > > except for the alsalib which will remain the old one. DUH - they > > > are not compatible. As said, activate the *full* repo and this will not happen. > > If you download selectively you are left with broken dependencies. > > That kind of caution is just doing the damage you are trying to > > avoid. > > > > Also using yum is known to munge your system. The recommended > > depsolver is apt (and smart for x86_64/i386 multilib systems) > > > My experience says otherwise. Of course I only have a few thousand > machines in 2 architectures: PPC and x86. Please check yum @ bugzilla.redhat.com and @ fedora-list. yum is known to be a trouble maker. E.g. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2005-January/msg01826.html OTOH yum is the only depsolver supported by RH (well up2date does not really count). > Axel, don't think I am chewing your butt. I am not. So why am I sitting on my belly? ;) > I use atrpms for a lot of things. probably 15% of my current setups > are from atrpms. And that says a lot. The advise to use a repo partially is just wrong, and it generates more problems that it is supposed to solve. Will you pick up supporting these poor souls that will have a broken alsa due to your guidance? Karsten, out of the thousand systems you have, just use one with ATrpms activated normally and using apt-get. Your view of things may drastically change. :) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
pgp6SahsSvECc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mythtv-users mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
