On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 15:47 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Right. The problem is when you agree to "update x", i.e., "install > x-N+1; remove x-N', and it fails (say, in case sys.stdout.write or > sys.stdout.flush raise an exception within callback) before it gets to > install x-N+1. Then RPM still ends up removing x-N, although > sometimes what I saw looked more like a --justdb removal (files and > libraries left behind, but package gone from the rpmdb), but in > others, as in the most recent case, elfutils libraries were really > gone. The above really isn't possible. If you can recreate this then please file a bug. File the bug against rpm but please cc me on it. > > So, if you have a case where pkgs are being removed that you have not > > agreed to remove, please file a bug with details. > > In the scenario above, would you say you agreed to remove x-N or not? > I.e., does it pass the condition you set for a bug report to be filed? If you have a case where x-N is being removed w/o x-N+1 being installed then yes, file a bug. -sv -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
