Re: Issue with rpm -U

["Kenneth Porter" <shiva well com>]

On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:42:00 -0700, Stephen Balukoff wrote:

>Is there a good reason (save for backward compatibility) that 'rpm -U'
>performs the (un)installation tasks in this order?  Am I the only one
>who thinks the current implementation does things rather bass-ackwards? 
>(I realize I can circumvent the issue by asking our customers to first
>do an 'rpm -e' on the package before doing an 'rpm -i', but IMO this is
>a poor workaround and still leaves the 'experienced' admin open to
>foobaring his system by doing an 'rpm -U'.)

See http://rpmdp.org/rpmbook/node25.html (from Maximum RPM) for what
happens. Install-before-erase ensures that modified config files are
preserved and not lost.

What does your upgrade do that breaks when this order is followed? What
do you need to do in your scripts that requires erase before install?

Here's a page from Maximum RPM that explains how to write a script so
that it properly handles the install-before-erase sequence:

http://rpmdp.org/rpmbook/node69.html#SECTION03532000000000000000

Ken
mailto:shiva@well.com
http://www.sewingwitch.com/ken/
http://www.harrybrowne2000.org/