On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 05:54:20PM -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 23:40:43 +0100, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Not sure how this fits in here. These are valid points you make, but > > they are valid for both the current and a soname-in-the-rpmname scheme > > :) > > keeping the package the same name... regardless of the soname means > on distro upgrade > the old version gets removed. This works to expire an older library > package but breaks externally build apps that need the old library. > You want to keep those things from breaking and I want to expired libs > off the system. I would prefer to use the sonames in the packages as > sparingly as possible.. to minimize the amount of deprecated libraries > on system...until there is a solution to the larger question of how > expiring of a package is suppose to work. Already posted in different siblings of this thread and implemented at ATrpms. Auto-expiring packages that should be disposed of if there is no dependency on them should simply provide a fake dependency to hook a garbage collector to. The concept is solid, proven on various distros and even within the Red Hat world at ATrpms. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpF35lGElw5n.pgp
Description: PGP signature
