On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 23:27, Warren Togami wrote: > Eh? jbj has confirmed on multiple occasions that there is NO DIFFERENCE > between PreReq and Requires. Well, it has been said by him and others so many times, so many different ways, in so many contexts, with so many "affected" rpm versions that it is not really clear to me (and I bet I'm not the only one), no need to shout. Even jbj's "confirmations" have been sort of self-contradicting. One such example is [1], where the first non-quoted paragraph from jbj mentions "preserving the PreReq: guarantee" for resolving circular dependencies with recent versions of rpm, and the last one says PreReq is "not any more" used for that for the same versions of rpm AFAICT. Whatever it's called nowadays, I don't care; The point made is still valid though: if loops cannot be avoided and the order matters, they should be made predictable with whatever tools are available, if any. If PreReq does not "exist" in the sense it used to any more, one such "tool" which supposedly nowadays at least partially replaces/provides that functionality are "context markers" (ie. Requires(pre) and friends if I've understood _that_ correctly). [1] https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/rpm-metadata/2003-October/000095.html
