Re: taking control of another package's file

[Jeff Johnson <n3npq jbj gmail com>]

On Feb 9, 2006, at 3:51 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote:

> On 2/9/06, Jos Vos <jos xos nl> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 09:50:35PM -0800, Joe Van Dyk wrote:
> >
> > > I'm creating an RPM that creates a new /etc/auto.master file (for
> > > automounting directories).
> > >
> > > Currently, the autofs package owns this file.  So when I try to
> > > install my RPM that overwrites /etc/auto.master, it complains  
> > > about a
> > > conflict between my RPM and the autofs RPM.
> > >
> > > What's the correct resolution here?
> >
> > You can consider using %trigger(un) scripts, they were designed for
> > inter=package pre/post (un)install scripts.  Note that the use of
> > trigger scripts does not comply with the LSB, but it works fine and
> > if the other package gets upgraded (e.g., new services file), the
> > script is running again.  Of course, you have to write that scripts
> > very carefully, idempotent, etc.
>
> So, to install my RPM that installs a file over another RPMs file, the
> user has to --force the rpm install?

Nope, not --force. --replacefiles iirc.

Meanwhile, "taking over another packages files" has never been  
implemented
intelligently in rpm if the files are different. Identical files are  
handled quite well.

Hint: Having 2 packages own different copies of a file is called a  
"packaging bug".

73 de Jeff