FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-02-2008, 07:43 PM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default Feature or bug? (strange?) yum behaviour

On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:

Are you saying that Fedora will publish any kind of cruft an upstream developer cranks out? *I was trying to give you guys some credit...



I am saying that it is an explicit goal of this project to work directly inside of the upstream communities as much as possible. Because we as a project care about making the widest impact as possible.* What is good for Fedora is generally good for other distributions which are relying on the same technology codebases.. and as a project we strive to have our contributors working inside of upstream project communities so the Fedora the distribution is a consumer of the results of balanced best effort decision-making.* So when someone in our community sees a problem with technical decisions that upstream is doing, we expect them to make a best effort to communicate their arguments to upstream before making a case to deviate from upstream decisions in the Fedora distribution specifically.* When individuals don't make that best effort to have the discourse as part of the upstream project, then they are debasing Fedora project and its mission to be a conduit for upstream development.


In the specific cases of cross-distro compatibility concerning yum behavior that you have brought up. Your logic is fundamentally flawed. Fedora specific changes which deviate from yum's upstream behavior will not guarantee cross distro compatibility...because no distro..not even RHEL is compelled to take fedora specific patches.*


If we continue to assume that you are being honest, and you actual care about cross-distro compatibility for yum.. then at some point I will be forced to moderate your access to this list in an effort to act in your best interest so that you'll move your discussion to the upstream yum channels so that cross-distro compatibility can be discussed in a way that has a shred of hope of solving your problems long term.* That's how much I care about making sure your interests are best served.* I know, its tough love, and believe me it will hurt me more than it hurts you to have to do it.


-jef"take a hint"spaleta


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-02-2008, 08:31 PM
Benny Amorsen
 
Default Feature or bug? (strange?) yum behaviour

James Antill <james.antill@redhat.com> writes:

> Did you install pygpgme from Fed-8 first? I've done many installs of
> rawhide yum on older versions and that's the only caveat I've seen.

Thank you! It works brilliantly after adding pygpgme.

It's sad that more dependencies are needed for something as basic as
yum, but knowing about it will certainly make the Fedora 9 upgrade
easier for me.


/Benny


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-02-2008, 08:35 PM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default Feature or bug? (strange?) yum behaviour

On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Benny Amorsen <benny+usenet@amorsen.dk> wrote:



It's sad that more dependencies are needed for something as basic as

yum,
Who you prefer that yum grow its own gpg implementation in order to correctly verify the gpg signatures on packages?

Why is code reuse sad?

-jef


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-02-2008, 09:20 PM
Mark
 
Default Feature or bug? (strange?) yum behaviour

2008/4/2, Benny Amorsen <benny+usenet@amorsen.dk>:
> It's sad that more dependencies are needed for something as basic as
> yum, but knowing about it will certainly make the Fedora 9 upgrade
> easier for me.
>

It's actually a good thing!
Now yum doesn't have with the possible bugs that would have been there
when they made there own version and there are a lot more advantages i
can think of. i rather have yum take up a dozen deps and be as fast as
it is now than it was a few years ago (that was horrible with big
updates).

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-02-2008, 09:24 PM
Ville Skyttä
 
Default Feature or bug? (strange?) yum behaviour

On Wednesday 02 April 2008, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Benny Amorsen
> <benny+usenet@amorsen.dk<benny%2Busenet@amorsen.dk >>
>
> wrote:
> > It's sad that more dependencies are needed for something as basic as
> > yum,
>
> Who you prefer that yum grow its own gpg implementation in order to
> correctly verify the gpg signatures on packages?
>
> Why is code reuse sad?

Reuse is not sad per se, but if this is indeed for checking package
signatures, rpm can do it and I assume the functionality to do it is exposed
to python from it - wouldn't it be better to reuse it from rpm instead of
pulling in an additional library for doing the same thing? Of course, there
may be good reasons to do it this way; I'm nowhere near familiar enough with
yum or rpm APIs or their development directions to be able to tell.

WAG: Or perhaps this is for checking signatures on something else than
packages, eg. repodata?

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-02-2008, 09:31 PM
Benny Amorsen
 
Default Feature or bug? (strange?) yum behaviour

"Jeff Spaleta" <jspaleta@gmail.com> writes:

> Who you prefer that yum grow its own gpg implementation in order to
> correctly verify the gpg signatures on packages?

Needing 7 packages for something as simple as checking a gpg signature
seems excessive to me. Of course they give me the ability to make
signatures and even securely type in a key, which is nice if you
happen to need that.

> Why is code reuse sad?

It isn't. Code reuse is good.


/Benny


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-02-2008, 09:34 PM
seth vidal
 
Default Feature or bug? (strange?) yum behaviour

On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 00:24 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> Reuse is not sad per se, but if this is indeed for checking package
> signatures, rpm can do it and I assume the functionality to do it is
> exposed
> to python from it - wouldn't it be better to reuse it from rpm instead
> of
> pulling in an additional library for doing the same thing? Of course,
> there
> may be good reasons to do it this way; I'm nowhere near familiar
> enough with
> yum or rpm APIs or their development directions to be able to tell.
>
> WAG: Or perhaps this is for checking signatures on something else
> than
> packages, eg. repodata?

It's actually for both:
- checking sigs on repodata
- eventually for checking sigs on packages - mainly so we don't have to
open up the rpmdb to check sigs - as you do right now b/c of the gpg
keys being stored in the rpmdb.

-sv


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-02-2008, 09:35 PM
seth vidal
 
Default Feature or bug? (strange?) yum behaviour

On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 23:31 +0200, Benny Amorsen wrote:
> "Jeff Spaleta" <jspaleta@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Who you prefer that yum grow its own gpg implementation in order to
> > correctly verify the gpg signatures on packages?
>
> Needing 7 packages for something as simple as checking a gpg signature
> seems excessive to me. Of course they give me the ability to make
> signatures and even securely type in a key, which is nice if you
> happen to need that.

'as simple as checking a gpg signature'?

Please show me how this is simple. Also if you have another module we
can use instead of pygpgme I am all ears.

-sv


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:40 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org