packaging rules

[Jakub Bogusz]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 09:07:35PM +0200, Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
> Is there anything against switching all NameObsoletes (Obsoletes: gdm
> in kdm etc.) to conflicts or dropping them altogether?
>
> I am the admin and I want to decide what to install with what. If I
> want 2 login managers, that's my problem, if I want 3 smtp services,
> that's my problem.

If you want to drop Obsoletes/Conflicts, make packages installable
together. If some packages conflict in rpm sense (i.e. have conflicting
files), packages should have proper Obsoletes or Conflicts tags.
Leaving users with --force is not an option.

If some packages are easily switchable replacements, Conflicts behaves
worse, because disallows to atomically replace package.

feature-Provides+Obsoletes is some solution, but causes problems with
old packages which didn't Provide given feature.

> Secondly, all managers except poldek try to "upgrade" gdm to kdm and
> vice-versa, exim to postfix and back etc.

I feel "all" really means yum (including its UIs)

> Obsoletes is there to mean "that package is no longer supported," not
> "mutually exclusive, replace as you wish."

In distros which don't provide alternative packages.
Or use "alternatives" mechanism, like Debian.


-- 
Jakub Bogusz    http://qboosh.pl/