Re: Proposal - don't install .rpmnew unless changed

[Neal Becker <ndbecker2 gmail com>]

Paul Howarth wrote:

> Neal Becker wrote:
>> Paul Howarth wrote:
>>>Neal Becker wrote:
>>>>Paul Howarth wrote:
>>>>>Neal Becker wrote:
>>>>>>It would save admins a lot of time if we modify rpm so that it does
>>>>>>not
>>>>>>create a .rpmnew file if there is no change from the old file.  I
>>>>>>would think this would be a simple modification.
>>>>>
>>>>>It already does this, doesn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I don't think so!  I keep syncing with develop every day, and most days
>>>>I get a bunch of messages about "blah created as .rpmnew", and every day
>>>>I run diff, and almost always get no output.
>>>
>>>Are you on an x86_64 box with lots of parallel-installed i386 packages?
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, x86_64.  I have most parallel i386 packages that are standard on
>> x86_64.  I did not install extra i386 packages.
>> 
>> Today, for example, there were a bunch of messages about upgrade to
>> kdelibs-3.5.0-5.  It does happen that there are both x86_64 and i386
>> versions of this, do you think this is the explanation?  In any case, any
>> chance to fix it?
> 
> I think it's the same issue (multiple packages owning the same config
> file) as for /etc/vimrc, except in this case it's different-arch
> packages instead of different-name packages.
> 
> I don't know what the *right* policy for these cases should be really.
> 

Isn't it "right" to not create .rpmnew and report it to the user if there is
no diff to the current version?