On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, devzero2000 wrote:It "works", except when it doesn't. If you can make sure the bundle is
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:36 PM, Seth Vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008, Valery Reznic wrote:
>
> > Did you try to use Obsolete tag ?
> >
>
> a couple of things about the whole thread
>
> 1. obsolete does not work when you're rpm -i'ing pkgs. Only rpm -U
>
> 2. modifying the rpmdb from a %post or %pre is an unsafe idea and
> prone to
> causing things to "end badly".
>
>
> It depends. If Jeff tell it is possible to have an "RPM bundle" (e.g. an
> rpm that install rpm(s) itself) then perhaps
> it is not so unsafe in first place. I personally have written un rpm that
> use yum for pull update.
only ever installed in a transaction of it's own, without --root, it'll
probably work just fine. But "rpm from within rpm" does break in some
cases, for example certain chroot install scenarios and more esoteric
cases such as glibc futex implementation changing in the same transaction.
And the breakage will always happen when you least expect it ;)
I must therefore imagine that the ability to " concurrent access" of rpm it is wrong.
i.e. rpm --showrc
.......
Features supported by rpmlib:
rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1
PreReq:, Provides:, and Obsoletes: dependencies support versions.
rpmlib(ConcurrentAccess) = 4.1-1
package scriptlets may access the rpm database while installing.
......
For me it is only little documented. But if it is thus harmful, it can sure itself be removed if you think so.
But sometime it is a useful feature (for me almost) . For example there exists cases of installation of RPM products proprietary that do not mandate rpm dependencies but that they work only if installed in a precise order. A rpm bundle it is a way for solving this problem.
Regards
_______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
