> For local RPM collections, RH8 has the Red Hat package manager. It's > still a bit limited, but I believe they are working to make it better and > more flexible. We'll see. But this is not the issue that is preventing > RHL from taking over the world, and it's not so easy to fix that someone > else has already done it.
Just a quick note about this whole dependency thing. Firstly, yes, I DO think it's a good thing when you need newer version of libs for example. The thing that's always bothered me (AND the OP I might add). Is that program XYZ requires a library OLDER than the one you have installed. Three words: This is crap. THAT'S where I think the major problem lies. Libraries provide functions. They should be added to, modified to make them faster, but never, ever, change for example the number or type of parameters to a function call. I do not know if that is what is happening or not, but if so this is where the problems lies. It breaks backwards-compatability. The minor problem, if the above is NOT happening, is that the creators of the RPMs should never have a requirement of 'progX requires liba == 1.24', it should always be progX requires liba >= 1.24'. In these cases it's the RPM creator at fault. I suppose we could all roll our own using SRPMs, but last 2 times I installed RH 8, I didn't even get the 'rpmrebuild' command installed. I only got the librpmrebuild stuff. (BTW - where is that damn rpmrebuild?) Anyways, in short, I agree with RPM being the way to do it. I just think the lib writers, and RPM creators need to get it right. Remember, it's not RPMs fault at all, but the creators of the package. RPM just follows THEIR rules. Stop blaming RPM. Regards, --- Edward Dekkers (Director) Triple D Computer Services P/L -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
