[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: RPM problem: prereq: <file> not honored in upgrade ordering?



On Thu, 16 Oct 2003, Pekka Savola wrote:
[...]
> Btw. I looked at rpm source and it looks like nodeps does not change the 
> package ordering.  You have to use a separate toggle, --noorder, to do 
> that.  So, if you are certain all of your deps are included. nodeps should 
> not do harm (I would still not use it though).  Package upgrade with the 4 
> RPMs with --nodeps *seems to* confirm this theory.
> 
> If jbj is listening, it would be nice to get an ACK/NACK on this..

FYI,

I discussed this with Jeff, and he said that currently --nodeps implies 
--noorder for performance reasons.  This change has been active for around 
a year at least, but whether it affects RPM 4.0.4 (used here) was a 
question mark.  In any case, the situation with --nodeps is not better, at 
least, with Fedora :-)

So, I'd even more strongly recommend against using --nodeps because its
new implication has quite severe implications with a large set of
interdependent packages.

But the core problem exists regardless of --nodeps, and I believe the 
original reordering problem also exists without nodeps (but that would 
have to be confirmed).

Jeff's initial guess about the problem was the way Alternatives
requirement is used, as a file requirement (doesn't really work in every
case) rather than a package.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]