Correct. But anyone who has been to a forum knows that there are so many
things users want to compile. And as long as post-install-installing the
packages from the nifty menu didn't work because:
- Broken autorun script on fc2 cd's
- fc2 system-config-packages was really borked anyway - all it did was
to say "please insert CD" - when i in reallity was inserted.
Is this fixed in fc3? I cant test, cus' i only have the NFS install
images...
Idealy, one should have a metapackage called "dev-tools" (or something
like that) in yum, which would "depend" on having yum, make, etc., a
"x-devel", a "gnome-devel" and a "kde-devel" package. Which
would make
it really simple to post-installation install it if needed.
fre, 01.10.2004 kl. 01.16 skrev Sindre Pedersen Bjordal:
Fedora Core can't base it's settings on some third party
driver.
And besides, NVIDIA drivers doesn't have to require you to compile
anything. Users should use the rpms from
http://rpm.livna.org for an
easier install and much easier update when there's a new driver
released.
tor, 30,.09.2004 kl. 17.32 -0400, skrev Jeff Spaleta:
> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 21:28:24 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis
> <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> wrote:
> > I see the problem. All those users of the nvidia driver will have
> > problems to build the kernel module. And what will they search for to
> > solve the problem: a kernel-source(code) rpm that is will not be part of
> > FC3 (as it seems).
>
> Fact: All those users who install fedora via the default "Desktop
> Install" option
> don't get the build tools to compile nvidia drivers as it is. Shall
> we pollute the default install to include all the development packages
> and build tools are there just in case someone wants to build
> something from source?
>
> The point is, as a packaging policy, the commonly required buildtools
> are not explicitly stated as buildrequirements for most src packages,
> nor for -devel binary packages. Your going to have to come up with a
> pretty impressive argument to make a need to one specific -devel
> package require cpp explicitly when -devel packages currently in the
> distro do not explicitly require gcc or cpp.
>
> -jef"112 -devel packages from Core installed and none of them
> explicitly require gcc or cpp which should a kernel-module-devel
> package be different?"spaleta
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > > When the case above would be very common, you can make the
> > > header-package part of the base-system but without requiring it
> > > explicitly. So it can be disabled on minimal installations.
> >
> > Don't understand this. How to solve the problem with updated kernels and
> > the needed headers for those? Add them all to one package and update
> > this every time a kernel-update is released -- this will be a big
> > package after some kernel-updates...
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info>
> >
> > --
> > fedora-devel-list mailing list
> > fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
> >
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
> >
>