On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 07:26 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Monday 31 January 2005 11:18 pm, Craig White wrote:
> > inasmuch as livna does not play nicely with other repositories - I would
> > heavily recommend against that choice.
>
> I generally use livna on my fedora boxes so I am surprized by this statement.
> Of course, I don't use other repositories either so maybe I am safe in that
> regard.
>
> - From the rpm.livna.org web site: " rpm.livna.org is not a standalone
> repository, but an extension of fedora.us." So, tell me about these other
> repositories and why livna does not play nice. Maybe there is a better way
> for me to do things.
>
> > see...
> > http://atrpms.net/repos/
> >
> > I would wholeheartedly recommend the following repositories...
> - --[clip]--
>
> So all these you can use together without the problems with using livna?
---
no - actually the opposite - you can use the rest without problems if
you don't use livna
but fedora.us isn't a regular fedora repository but an 'extra'
There is nothing wrong with using fedora.us and livna on a system but it
can be limiting and of course there is no guarantee that you won't get
conflicts if you add packages from freshrpms, dag or atrpms. There is a
new package - rather beta at the moment that is called 'smart' that will
detect and offer choices when confronted with repository conflicts but I
have decided to steer clear of livna and fedora.us for the time
being...I think freshrpms, dag and atrpms offer the best packages
considering breadth and support. YMMV
Craig
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)