[ATrpms-users] New libva Package has Conflict on F14

[Paulo Cavalcanti]

On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Kevin J. Cummings <
cummings at kjchome.homeip.net> wrote:

> On 03/12/2011 03:27 PM, Brian Long wrote:
> > Kevin,
> > It's very "iffy" mixing RPMs from rpmfusion and ATrpms.  As Paulo said,
> > you should choose which of the above you want and remove the other.
> > Also, I don't recommend leaving rpmfusion and ATrpms enabled at the same
> > time; only enable them when you know you really want something from one
> > of those repos.
>
> Brian,
>        I've been mixing things from ATRPMs and RPMFusion for years.  The
> biggest reason is that despite those packages that they both provide
> (sometimes differently packaged), they also provide packages that the
> other doesn't (or didn't used to).
>
>        I choose to get the nvidia driver from RPMFusion.  Why?  Because at
> the
> time I first installed it, I was able to get RPMFusion's drivers to
> install and work.  I could not say the same for ATRPMs versions (which
> were packaged differently).
>
>        I choose to play with MythTV.  Axel's packages were the only ones
> available when I started.  So I installed them, got them working, then
> had to fix my RPMFusion repos to exclude then when RPMFusion made them
> available (packaged differently).  I don't wish to get in between Axel
> and Jared when they start fighting.  B^)  Chaulk one up to Axel because
> he was first.
>
>        Axel provides mpg123.  RPMFusion provides mpg321.  Both obsolete the
> other.  That's a nightmare!  I chose to go with ATRPMs version.  Mostly
> because it was available first.
>
>        The Python Imaging Library is another example.  Should I have PIL or
> python-imaging installed?  They are packaged differently, but one of
> them comes from Fedora.  How do Fedora and ATRPMs version differ?
> That's what's not clear to me.  I choose to stay with Fedora's versions.
> They will work better with more 3rd party packages.
>
> For the time being I have decided to exclude gnome-mplayer from ATRPMs.
>
> As you can see, I've already made up my mind.  (It was easier to add one
> exclude=.  This might be the weakest of my arguments.)
>
> I will continue to add repos as I find things useful to me, and for all
> of the repos I use, RPMFusion vs ATRPMs is where all of my conflicts
> are.  That is the most distressing fact out there.  I suppose if that
> wasn't the case, Axel would've merged with RPMFusion (like FreshRPMs,
> and Livna, and a few more did) and these problems would have disappeared
> by now.  I don't have this problem with city-fan.org (the only other 3rd
> party repo that I use with any regularity besides those listed above).
>
> End of Rant.   B^)
>
>
Have you ever thought about how Fedora works?

The packages are submitted and stay waiting until another packager decides
to review it.
The review process can take, in some cases, a couple of years, and it is not
uncommon having
to suppress a lot of good code because of "patent" issues, and xine-lib is a
good example.

Therefore, for making Fedora usable to the ordinary public, the removed code
magically appears in a third party
repo as "something-freeworld". Well, this is what makes ATrpms different.
Instead of filling the gaps
we provide the full packages, such as audacious, xine-lib, vlc, etc...

Another difference, for being able to upgrade packages without having to
recompile all packages that depend on it,
Axel uses an scheme based on Debian, for instance,
libdca0-0.0.5-4.fc14.x86_64.rpm. If libdca is upgraded and has
an API (or soname) change, we do not need to rebuild all of its dependencies
at once, because the shared libraries from the previous version are still
available.  Some people think this is an heresy, but that how life is. One
can not praise everybody ...

I personally believe that a package should be broken only for upgrading
reasons. Otherwise, I am for a monolithic approach.
We are not building servers, but desktops, and disk is so cheep these days
that there is no point in avoiding installing all of its dependencies.

Finally, the packages at ATrpms are update in a pace that follows upstream
very close, and mythtv is just a good example.
Furthermore, isn't it the spirit of Fedora, that is, always providing
bleeding edge software?

I would not like to be misunderstood. I like Fedora very much, and this is
why I spend so much time building and testing packages,
but in a third party repo one can be abide by different rules ...

-- 
Paulo Roma Cavalcanti
LCG - UFRJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-users/attachments/20110313/90bcdc1a/attachment.html>