smart package mgr question?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Axel Thimm wrote:

>> What am I pointing out is that what functionality RPM offers is 
>> different from what is being designed for.
> 
> It was designed for allowing downgrades and it has this
> functionality. So there is no such difference for the topic discussed.

There is where we disagree.

>> I never heard any RPM developer describe rpm's ability to do
>> downgrades as part of its design (quite the opposite) nor did I see
>> it being described as such in any RPM guides.
> 
> I just gave you a quote out of the "RPM guides" that explicitely does
> so that you trimmed in your reply. Didn't you read it?

Yes. I did but its not described anywhere as a design goal. We already 
know that RPM has this feature. So pointing out that to me makes no 
difference.


> And wrt rpm developers stating that rpm does not support downgrades -
> since you don't want to check the archives/bugzilla, I challenge you
> to state that on rpm user/devel list. I'm sure you'll read some strong
> rectifying answers on that. ;)

I have talked to rpm people on IRC before when rpm rollbacks got screwed 
up so I dont feel the need to go witch hunting now again on this.  When 
we decide who the upstream is next, I will make sure to ask them about 
downgrades ;-). Anyway, enough of this now.

Rahul