Thanks Greg, great appreciate your explanation. Kind regards, Jupiter On 8/25/12, Greg Swift <gregswift@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 6:40 AM, jupiter <jupiter.hce@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Thanks Greg. Please embedded comments. >> >> On 8/25/12, Greg Swift <gregswift@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> As far as i am aware there is no disabling that. >> >> So there is not tag in rpm spec to have the same function of forcing >> installation (force replacement) without using --force? I thought if >> you can do something in rpm command line, it should have the same >> functional tag in spec, very much like to use "Autoreqprov: no, >> Autoprov: no, Autoreq: no" for --nodeps, right? > > Most of those macros and functions are to affect things buring the RPM > build process, not at install time. The ones you mentioned are not > actually equivilent to --nodeps. They tell the built in RPM functions > to not try and 'discover' what teh requirements and provides are. > Typically you would use these because they are finding the wrong > things, or more than is necessary. You would then use the manual > Requires and Provides to make the RPM dependency chain correct. > Turning them all off and then not manually specifying things does > behave similarly to --nodeps, but only because there are now no > dependencies. > >>> I see what you are doing, but can you explain why? Maybe we can give a >>> better answer knowing more. >> >> As I said, I have two applications sharing the same configuration file >> (There is a reason for doing it, let's not try to change it). If none >> of the application package is installed, the first one instals the >> configuration file, then the second application package should do >> nothing if it finds the configuration file has already been there. >> Although the "%config config.txt" is used in spec, I really don't mind >> if the configuration file is overwritten or not as long as it is >> there. > > So if the applications MUST use the same config file I believe the > best path forward would be to break the config into a separate package > and have both of the original packages Require it. You said that it > can have different content, depending on the two parent packages, but > I can also install both packages. I would do my best to make sure the > config file works for both at the same time, and comes out of the box > that way from the separate package. > _______________________________________________ > Rpm-list mailing list > Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list > _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
