[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [rpm-list] provides in ~/.rpmrc ? 3.0.6 vs. 4.4.6
- From: Kevin Cosgrove <kevinc doink com>
- To: RPM Package Manager <rpm-list redhat com>
- Subject: Re: [rpm-list] provides in ~/.rpmrc ? 3.0.6 vs. 4.4.6
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 10:36:59 -0800
On 27 October 2006 at 18:28, Jeff Johnson <n3npq jbj gmail com> wrote:
> > Now that I've upgraded to rpm 4.4.6 "provides: <something>" in
> > ~/.rpmrc is no longer valid. I've gone through the CHANGES file
> > and the manual pages, but I can't find anything that indicates
> > where this functionality moved to, or even if it still exists.
>
> Man, rpm-3.0.6 is a blast from the past.
>
> The new location to "spoof" system provides is
> /etc/rpm/sysinfo
> same format as
> rpm -q --requires popt
> output, i.e. dependencies one per-line (file paths like "/bin/sh"
> permitted too).
>
> Note that it is now possible to express versions and ranges, not
> just existence, with "spoofed" system Provides:.
>
> And expect the path /etc/rpm/sysinfo to change in rpm-4.4.8, when
> I wire up the ability to express not only Provides:, but also
> Requires:, Conflicts:, Obsoletes: and perhaps triggers, all
> attached as per-transaction, not per-package, dependencies.
I got the above working. Because I'm installing rpm in
a non-standard location I had to alter the location of
/etc/rpm/sysinfo I tried this with %_rpmds_sysinfo_path which
didn't work because that path is hardcoded into
+++ rpm-4.4.6/lib/depends.c 2006-11-09 15:19:35.000000000 -0800
+++ rpm-4.4.6/lib/rpmds.c 2006-11-09 15:19:48.000000000 -0800
+++ rpm-4.4.6/lib/rpmds.h 2006-11-09 15:19:52.000000000 -0800
+++ rpm-4.4.6/lib/rpmrc.c 2006-11-09 15:19:55.000000000 -0800
+++ rpm-4.4.6/python/rpmds-py.c 2006-11-09 15:19:58.000000000 -0800
+++ rpm-4.4.6/tools/rpmdeps.c 2006-11-09 15:20:00.000000000 -0800
I patched those files with my compile-time path (I'm building on
multiple systems with OS & arch specific paths) to sysinfo. As I
said, this seems to work fine. But, I thought you might want to
hear about it anyway.
Thanks....
--
Kevin
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]