On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 16:51 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > On Lun 9 janvier 2006 16:16, Peter Jones wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 10:54 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > >> On Lun 9 janvier 2006 05:51, Peter Jones wrote: > >> > On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 19:21 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > >> > > >> >> Well, if Fedora is serious about this rule, should not Fedora's rpm > >> be > >> >> patched to emit a warning when operating on a dir owned by something > >> >> else ? > >> > > >> > rpm knows about packages, not repos. > >> > >> rpm knows about its db state when performing > >> installations/uninstallations. > >> > >> I meant a warning at rpm -U/-i or -e time not at rpmbuild time > > > > Then you're notifying the wrong people that something is wrong. > > Do you really believe it's not the user problem if its system is about to > switch to a state where we know problem may happen ? I really don't think this ever hurts a user, it's just a matter of tidiness. But more to the point, we can't restrict this sort of thing in other repos a user may be using, and we'll never be able to. I don't like spending effort on something we really can't address in any meaningful way. It's a policy for the repo, about the repo, regarding how packages that are part of the repo should behave. It is only a problem in the context of the repo. The checking belongs in the relationship between a package and the repo. Nowhere else. > > If > > you're going to automagically probe for this and raise some > > error/warning/notification, it needs to happen when the package is added > > to a repo. > > Sure > > > Before then it's incorrect, > > Why ? Because a single package can't conflict with itself in this way? The entire notion of the problem only exists within the context of a repo. You can't tell that a package is violating the rule unless you know where the package is going. Furthermore, the installed set of packages may not be a reliable source for what is and isn't going to be in the repo -- think about Obsoletes: . > > and after then it doesn't help to know it's busted. > > Of course it helps, do you really believe we catch every problem at the > packaging stage ? I really think we can throw an error when you try to add something broken to the repository. > You could as well advocate removal of every single > warning/error in live systems, since problems should be fixed before > software is shipped (in an ideal lalala world) This would be a warning message that's only useful to developers. As such, we should not be displaying it during installation, as it only serves to confuse most users. -- Peter
