Re: Doesn't "rpm -e" erase in reverse dependency order?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 06:02:55PM -0800, Christian Goetze wrote:

> # rpm -e foo bar baz
> 
> it may choose to erase foo prior to bar, even though bar depends on foo.
> 
> This means I cannot rely on the existence of features witn %postun
> scriptlets, for example.

OK, sorry I misinterpreted it... to answer this, you should define
"depends" in the above sentence in more detail.  For installation
(%post scripts etc.) you have to use "Prereq" (deprecated) or
"Requires(post)" etc. (as you probably know), as just "Requires"
does not affect the order *within* a translation.

For %postun scripts you have to use "Requires(postun)".  However,
I remember a discussion about this on the fedeora-devel (IIRC) list
saying that this is not working correctly at the moment.

Probably Jeff can comment in more details about this.

-- 
--    Jos Vos <jos@xxxxxx>
--    X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV   |   Phone: +31 20 6938364
--    Amsterdam, The Netherlands        |     Fax: +31 20 6948204

_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

[Index of Archives]     [RPM Ecosystem]     [Linux Kernel]     [Red Hat Install]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Watch]     [Red Hat Development]     [Red Hat]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [IETF Discussion]

  Powered by Linux