Panu Matilainen wrote: > On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 16:32 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: >>>> Can you say what it is? I'm seeing this on my centos 5.2 mock host. >> >>> The rpm version on the host has to be able to support the larger file >>> checksums. We have a special rpm built for our EL5 builders that >>> provides this. I don't know if that rpm build is hosted anywhere out in >>> the open, I do believe Mitr built it for us. >> >> It's going to be quite a large problem if people can no longer use mock >> on an older system to test rawhide builds. What is the plan to address >> this? > > The strong file hashes are just the first messenger that got through, > and the message it brings is that it's time for people to wake up from > the sleep of last hundred, err, ten years and realize that rpm can and > does change. And yes it means older rpm versions can't always install > packages built by a newer rpm. In the future can we make it policy that before any new, non-backwards-compatible rpm features are turned on in the build system, that all actively-supported distros have an rpm that supports those features available in the stable repos for a reasonable period of time? Not being able to install packages coming out of Koji has a very negative effect on development, testing, package review, etc. We also want to avoid the situation of people running actively-supported distros being permanently locked-out of the ability to update or upgrade, if for example the rpm in the repos was built using a feature that the previous version of rpm did not support. rpm is a critical (maybe *the* critical) piece of our installation/upgrade infrastructure, we need to be more careful with compatibility. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
