On 24.11.2007 13:06, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> As I said, I don't want to do that:
I understand, but I just wanted to verify it /would/ work, not to
discuss implementing it. [...]
I know it works, and just rechecked on F7, where the groups from the
livna repo has the same name and id like the ones from Fedora.
>>> I doubt filling a bug against yum will help. Fedora
likely will tell us
>>> to use the same group-id then Fedora. I'd like to avoid that, as it will
>>> be harder for people to find RPM Fusions packages. And there are
>>> problems in anaconda as well, as you will get packages marked as
>>> "<packagereq type="default">" only if you
unselected and reselect a group.
How about a separate category for RPM Fusion packages? You would need to
try to not use the same group.name, and not the same group.groupid.
Sounds reasonable and doable, don't you think?
Again, just an idea / my $0.02
Sorry, but again we are going in circles (some typos fixed):
>> As you can see, I gave a RPM Fusion specific ID (and group;
see at the
>> bottom of the page), but used the same <name> as in Fedora, which IMHO
>> should be a valid thing to do, but is the reason for the problem.
>> We could work around the problem by adding " (from RPM Fusion)" to the
>> "<name>Games and Entertainment</name>" line. Then yum would
>> that would look ugly and redundant in pirut. Does anyone have a better
>> idea how to solve the issue?