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

Re: librpm / corrupt free list in an FD_t (help please)



> And even if you disagree about how dead rpm-3.0.x is, you have no
> business using rpm-3.0.4 for anything.  Upgrade at least to rpm-3.0.5
> or rpm-3.0.6, available from ftp://ftp.rpm.org/pub/rpm/dist/rpm-3.0.x/
> 
> (Note: upgrading to rpm-3.0.6 can be "interesting"; see the following
> rpm-list thread:
> 
>   http://www.redhat.com/mailing-lists/rpm-list/msg17466.html
> 

/******************** [ snip ] ****************************************/
       Here's the root of the problem:

         - RHL-6.2 was released with rpm-3.0.4.
         
         - Soon after, development of RPM shifted to the next major
version
           (rpm-4.0), which contained some backwards-incompatible
changes in
           the packaging format.  rpm-3.0.4 cannot read packages
produced by
           rpm-4.0.
/******************** [ snip ] ****************************************/


	What conserns me is the ability to update software
remotely (on the "Jukebox" that we sell) without any
human interaction. (I am convinced now that rpm-4.x
probably 4.1 will work better for me).

	I can tell that this was a nightmare to say 
the least for alot of redhat users. 
But if I had to choose between incompatibility 
issues and locking databases/broken "freelist chains" 
I'd take incompatibility in a second.

I would still like to thank everyone who responded
to me on this list. Jeff was a *great* help 
and very straight to the point.


Cheers,
			-Tristan

PS:
I'm now working on a port of my code to work
with librpm-4.1/db3.



Jim Knoble wrote:
> 
> Circa 2003-01-11 10:03:40 -0500 dixit Jeff Johnson:
> 
> : On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 04:26:21PM -0500, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> : > will librpm 4.1 be able to install/read/etc packages generated by
> : > rpm 3.0.4 ?
> :
> : Yes.
> :
> : I'd still suggest using something other than rpm-3.0.4
> : to build packages, rpm-3.0.x is dead, has been for several
> : years.
> 
> And even if you disagree about how dead rpm-3.0.x is, you have no
> business using rpm-3.0.4 for anything.  Upgrade at least to rpm-3.0.5
> or rpm-3.0.6, available from ftp://ftp.rpm.org/pub/rpm/dist/rpm-3.0.x/
> 
> (Note: upgrading to rpm-3.0.6 can be "interesting"; see the following
> rpm-list thread:
> 
>   http://www.redhat.com/mailing-lists/rpm-list/msg17466.html
> 
> Feel free to ignore the vitriolic portions of my response in that
> thread.)
> 
> --
> jim knoble  |  jmknoble@pobox.com  |  http://www.pobox.com/~jmknoble/
> (GnuPG fingerprint: 31C4:8AAC:F24E:A70C:4000::BBF4:289F:EAA8:1381:1491)
> "I am non-refutable."  --Enik the Altrusian
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature





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