Activity depends on Fedora-packaged binary code

[elw at stderr.org]

>> This thing obviously doesn't scale and in the long term we may end up 
>> reinventing a full blown package manager with dependency tracking, plus 
>> tools like apt for downloading and installing them.
>
> But seriously, does the XO really need two package managers? What's 
> wrong with Fedora/RPM/yum? Do people really need to spend ergs on 
> supporting Debian?

Neither APT/dpkg/deb nor yum/.rpm toolkits have, that I know of, any kind 
of support in them right now that would let them work safely with 
something like Bitfrost/Rainbow/security domains.

This is, obviously, a pretty important thing for Linux in general, across 
all distributions, and particularly for projects like OLPC.

Some wheel-reinvention may go on, possibly more than once, before dust 
settles and folks agree on a common solution that is more than just a 
one-off hack to support OLPC.

[Something like Conary, or IPS, or whatever someone finally does the 
legwork to make extensible into bitfrost/rainbow-land.... I suppose there 
could be considered to be an arms race of getting the technology worked 
out to do the right things with minimal hassle :-)]

--e