rpm-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx wrote on 10/27/2006 01:19:11 PM: > On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 01:17:05PM -0400, Fulko.Hew@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > I would, but the std tarballs such as (in the case of bash), from > > FSF.org don't come with spec files. Do you suggest that I hunt > > down Redhat's version of a source? > > Hunt down? > ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/4/en/os/i386/SRPMS Thank you. (But FWIW, I should let everyone know that I'm _not_ updating a redhat based system with these changes.) > > Perhaps, but the person who built our package manager manager > > chose to rpm -e followed by rpm -i, whenever a package is upgraded. > > This is probably due to the reason that during the install process > > (because its actually install and not upgrade), we have to be able > > to 'install' older versions of an RPM incase the 'new' rpm failed > > because and embedded application failed within the new rpm, > > or because the customer decided that they wanted to fall-back > > to an older version of the same rpm > > > > I don't think that rpm allows you to upgrade to an older version. > > rpm -U --oldpackage rpm > > or, if you must, --force. According to the man page, --force is the same as --oldpackage (I hope it really is). Then my next concern would be that --force (which I could then hopefully use generically in both the new and old directions) would hopefully not also turn off any of the error checking such as dependencies and results of the pre, post, preun, and postun blocks. I will consider it, but these are architectural changes that I was really trying to avoid doing at this point in the project (although I had already thought about it). :-( > > This document is strictly confidential and intended only for use > by the addressee unless otherwise stated. If you are not the > intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete > it from your system. > > You do know the archives for this list are publicly displayed? :) Yes... I know... Its a waste of bandwidth and screen space, but its a damn corporate boilerplate that I can't disable! :-( And yes... I do know how stupid it looks and how worthless disclaimers really are. :-) But then again... anybody who reads this is technically the intended recipient! This document is strictly confidential and intended only for use by the addressee unless otherwise stated. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your system. _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
