smart package mgr question?
Axel Thimm
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Sun Oct 1 09:02:28 UTC 2006
On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 11:31:15AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > RPM is not designed for downgrades
>
> >One of the core features of rpm from the very beginning was to
> >downgrades and uninstalls so the user is able to revert from a bad
> >package. So rpm does indeed support downgrades by design.
>
> Except that there is no proper way to revert back changes that is done
> through install scripts or triggers and what not. There is also the
> thing that QA is never done on downgrades.
Packages can be broken, of course, and any package installing itself
in an inrevocable way in scriplets that isn't undone by %*un scripts
is usually broken irrespective of downgrade or upgrades. You can also
have broken packages breaking upgrade paths, and we have a large list
of such existing examples.
In short broken packages don't indicate any (missing) abilities in
rpm itself. Otherwise for each feature of rpm we could find a broken
package and we'd conclude that rpm is designed for nothing. ;)
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20061001/967ca370/attachment-0001.sig>
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list