Axel Thimm schrieb:
On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 02:43:31PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 21.12.2006 14:24, Axel Thimm wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 02:10:18PM +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 08:55:25PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>>>> Hey all, I've just added a draft proposal for limiting file
dependencies
>>>> in packages. It's a "should" recommendation at this
point.
>>>>
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/FileDeps
>>>> = File Deps Guideline =
>>>> == Problem ==
>>> How often does this problem really occur? I just checked core's x86_64
>>> packages and there are exactly 12 files in such dependencies
>>> affecting 18 packages out of 2422 (that's 0.7%):
>> And the same metrics for extras: 26 files required by 27 packages out
>> of 3660 packages:
>> That's again 0.7%, so the combined Fedora is at 0.7%, too.
> Well, my initial calculations found 32 file based deps outside of "/etc
> {/usr,}/{s,}bin/" in Extras 6 x64 ;-) Just to note, I mentioned that
> when I started the whole mess after skvidal poked me about it. See
>
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2006-December/msg00077.html
But then it was known that this is negligible,
"negligible" IMHO is debatable, but yes, it's not a big problem
(currently).
And just to clarify: I just started to look into it because skvidal
poked me about it. I had no interest in it myself and after the initial
research I did te thing rolled on its own.
why does it escalate
to become even a proposal for guidelines?
To avoid that there get more of those added in the future?
Do we care that yum fetches
the filelists every 140 package updates?
If it can be avoided easiy: yes.
There is also the OLPC hardware that seems to be quite slow and will
probably take ages to resolve such a dep. We should keep that in mind, too.
CU
thl