On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 19:48, Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 7:24 PM Peter Boy <pboy(a)uni-bremen.de> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Am 30.01.2021 um 17:45 schrieb Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>:
> >
> > On 30.01.2021 16:58, Peter Boy wrote:
> >> But it’s perfectly usable for Fedora Workstation or Server and almost
indispensable for some development projects, e.g. Java (and vi/vim for a terminal
environment). Why should alternatives not be usable there? Or what is a suitable and
adequate replacement?
> >
> >
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Alternatives/
>
> Thanks for the info. Unfortunately, I don’t see a connection to immutable Fedora (it
is about drop-in, user configurable, etc). Or do I miss something?
If you read the Packaging Guidelines, they actually explicitly mention
that vi / vim are a bad example for using the alternatives system -
because they're not drop-in replacements.
Additionally, as far as I know, OSTree based Fedora variants do not
execute any RPM scriptlets, but implement their own handling of e.g.
ldconfig and such things.
And alternatives is definitely not compatible with OSTree - according
to these bug reports, at least Java alternatives are broken -
apparently primarily because OSTree stores configuration in /var
instead of /etc:
I think you meant: "...because alternatives stores configuration in
/var instead of /etc"
>
> -
>
>
> Fabio
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: