[Fwd: Re: [PlanetCCRMA] New Apt problems]

[William M. Quarles]

William M. Quarles wrote:
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> From: Fernando Lopez-Lezcano <nando@ccrma.Stanford.EDU>
> Subject: Re: [PlanetCCRMA] New Apt problems
> To: William M. Quarles <walrus@bellsouth.net>
> CC: nando@ccrma.Stanford.EDU
> 
> On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 17:49, William M. Quarles wrote:
> 
>> Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> 
> 
> BTW, thanks for being so patient...

Patient?  With what?  I've been pushy and finger-pointing and a whole 
bunch of things.  I should say thank you for being not only patient but 
tolerant.

<snip>
>> > Ah, it did try to install from FreshRPMs, didn't it?  Hey, I didn't 
>> notice that.  I sure wish that the two repositories had less commmon 
>> ground. 
> 
> It is in my plans to try to merge with (at least) freshrpms. There is
> unnecessary overlap. The problem for me is that I want also to be able
> to be "standalone" for several reasons.

Completely understandable on both sides of that coin...

<snip>
>> I guess that FreshRPMs' Libmad has something in it that the 
>> PlanetCCRMA one does not?  Oh well.
> 
> Yes. They should be compatible. I'll look into what is different, I want
> to be compatible with other repositories. I was, I think, so something
> must have changed in freshrpms.

...however one of the annoying things about GNU/Linux is that there are 
so many different distributions out there which are only about 50% 
compatible with each other.  Having various repositories for the same 
distribution that are degenerate but aren't quite compatible with each 
other is also mess.  I'm in favor of that GNU/Linux standardization 
campaign.  Not that I think that every distribution should be exactly 
the same, but better standardization would make software writing and 
distribution a lot easier.

I guess something else to consider is that there has been talk of 
multiple Fedora distributions, including the now-realized Fedora Extras 
collection of packages on fedora.us.  These Extras include a lot of 
things that you and Matthias already have.  That might be something else 
to consider when thinking about which packages to continue maintaining 
on your repository, because Fedora Extras could be used as a standard. 
It might also decrease some of your work!

<snip>
>> Out of curiousity, is there a way that I can find out which 10 
>> packages are _not_ being upgraded?
> 
> If, in those conditions, you do an "apt-get dist-upgrade" you should get
> a list of the packages that would be upgraded, you can always say "n" at
> the prompt for comfirmation.

Thanks.  After running it that line, my guess is that it is FreshRPMs 
packages that it is avoiding upgrading.

Peace,
William