1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release task-obsolete-3-1.mga3
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20%5Bchangelog%5D%20%5BRPM%5D%20cauldron%0A%09core/release%09task-obsolete-3-1.mga3&In-Reply-To=%3C4FC58B2F.7010100%40laposte.net%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="015938.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="015927.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release task-obsolete-3-1.mga3</H1>
<B>andre999</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20%5Bchangelog%5D%20%5BRPM%5D%20cauldron%0A%09core/release%09task-obsolete-3-1.mga3&In-Reply-To=%3C4FC58B2F.7010100%40laposte.net%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release task-obsolete-3-1.mga3">andre999mga at laposte.net
</A><BR>
<I>Wed May 30 04:51:27 CEST 2012</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="015938.html">[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release task-obsolete-3-1.mga3
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="015927.html">[Mageia-dev] submission error: false positive
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#15947">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#15947">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#15947">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#15947">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>Colin Guthrie a écrit :
><i> 'Twas brillig, and Jani Välimaa at 29/05/12 16:13 did gyre and gimble:
</I>><i>
</I>>><i> On 29.05.2012 17:38, Sander Lepik wrote:
</I>>><i>
</I>>>><i> 29.05.2012 17:14, wally kirjutas:
</I>>>><i>
</I>>>>><i> Name : task-obsolete Relocations: (not relocatable)
</I>>>>><i> Version : 3 Vendor: Mageia.Org
</I>>>>><i> Release : 1.mga3 Build Date: Tue May 29
</I>>>>><i> 15:59:18 2012
</I>>>>><i> [...]
</I>>>>><i>
</I>>>>><i> wally<wally> 3-1.mga3:
</I>>>>><i> + Revision: 249259
</I>>>>><i> - obsolete old libxfce4menu pkgs
</I>>>>><i>
</I>>>><i> Hmm, since when do we obsolete libs like this?
</I>>>><i>
</I>>>><i>
</I>>><i> Since task-obsolete was introduced. It's a way to get rid of old,
</I>>><i> obsoleted and unused pkgs which are also removed from SVN (moved to
</I>>><i> /packages/obsolete/).
</I>>><i>
</I>><i> I wasn't aware we ever did this and I can't think of a good reason to do
</I>><i> so either so I would prefer this change was reverted (and any other old
</I>><i> libs in there similarly removed from obsoletion).
</I>><i>
</I>><i> There is a difference between no longer shipping something and no longer
</I>><i> supporting it being installed. If I've compiled my own software against
</I>><i> any given library I do not want something to remove it automatically and
</I>><i> break my build. That's the whole point in having library packaging the
</I>><i> way we do - to allow them to live on mostly forever on an installed
</I>><i> system. If we no longer support something being installed then using
</I>><i> task-obsoletes seems wise.
</I>><i>
</I>+1
If there is no real conflict, why remove a package automatically ?
A good example of such a problem is OpenOffice being removed by Libreoffice.
There was no real conflict, as all files were installed in different
locations. As well, the 2 programs could even be run simultaneously.
Although mdv Openoffice was Go-ooo and Libreoffice contained much of the
same code, they didn't function identically.
So Libo removing Ooo automatically was abusive of a user's right to
choose what is installed in their system.
If it is advisable that such a package should be removed, the user
should be asked before removal.
Another point :
If would be a good idea if only mga packages would be removed.
(For mga1, that would have been mdv.)
If the user chooses to install a package from another source, it
shouldn't be unistalled by a mga package.
For version upgrades of the same package, or things like gcc, there
would be real conflicts,
so this wouldn't apply.
><i> Users are then responsible for removing old library packages they no
</I>><i> longer want from their system using either the urpme --auto-orphans or
</I>><i> urpmq --not-available.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Maybe I've misunderstood the intention here, and if so feel free to
</I>><i> correct me!
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Col
</I>><i>
</I>><i>
</I>My 2 cents :)
--
André
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="015938.html">[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] cauldron core/release task-obsolete-3-1.mga3
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="015927.html">[Mageia-dev] submission error: false positive
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#15947">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#15947">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#15947">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#15947">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<hr>
<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev
mailing list</a><br>
</body></html>
|
