Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2009/3/4 Ralf Corsepius <[email protected]>:
Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2009/3/4 Andrea Musuruane <[email protected]>:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Ralf Corsepius <[email protected]>
wrote:
... but you could use non-free to replace packages from free ...
It's essentially the same as to replace packages from Fedora with
RPMFusion
packages, only that it would be RPMFusion replacing itselves ;)
It is RPM Fusion policy NOT to replace packages from Fedora.
We do not replace package, we replace library using the system dynamic
linker.
The result is essentially the same:
I was trying to say it was not, and tried to say why, but it was snaped....
- Non deterministic system behavior
Can you elaborate a little bit ?
Quite simple: Your *.so's suffer from different bugs than the version in
Fedora, your *.so's provide different features than the packages in
Fedora => Different application behavior, function-wise and bugs-wise.
Whether you only replace the libs or even the applications doesn't
matter much.
The only real difference is, when only replacing the *.so's you don't
have to care about consistency wrt. applications (installation paths,
number of applications etc.).
Remember that wxsvg-freeworld have been rejected because the
with_ffmpeg broke the ABI with ffmpeg_less version provided in fedora.
Do I understand correctly? RPMFusion has decided not provide the ffmpeg
enabled wxsvg?
What shall I think of this?
- Potential NEVR and file conflicts and "NEVR races".
Possible.... Do you have cases studies ?
The kmods vs. akmod vs. kernel issues are such a case.
Ralf
