Sure, but I still need more features than just unpacking the RPMs. And though it is possible to implement it using command line arguments and stdout parsing, the library approach is much easier.
----- "Chris Lumens" <email@example.com> wrote:
> > FWIW, I agree with Martin that we need his approach for now, which
> > isolated, and can rip it out and switch over to a pure RPM-based
> > later.
> There's a trap here. Once we've written and committed something,
> in. As long as it works, no one will really want to touch it to use
> rpm, and everyone will be too busy to really think about it. Add in
> fact that it'll be in RHEL and therefore be much harder to change.
> - Chris
> Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list