On Jul 31, 2007, at 7:02 AM, Jesse Becker wrote: > Just as a bit of additional information (not taking sides either > way here), there are some RPM package names that may be ambiguous. > > For example, there are the infamous 'db' packages, frequently named > "db3", "db4", and so on, in addition to having a version string. > From one of my CentOS4 systems: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpm -q db4 > db4-4.2.52-7.1 > > There are some packages that are even worse: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpm -q compat-libgcc-296 compat-libstdc++-296 > compat-libgcc-296-2.96-132.7.2 > compat-libstdc++-296-2.96-132.7.2 > > The package names are actually "compat-libgcc-296" and "compat- > libstdc++-296". You would have to somehow disambiguate the "296" > as being part of the package name, instead of a version string. > > Just something to ponder, in case it affects any of the code.
It doesn't right now. My tendancy and recommendation would be for explicit and complete names. That's how most shops I know run things, and thus none of these names are conflicts. However, there is nothing to prevent someone from using a less explicit name and counting on their local patch manager to Do The Right Thing. YMMV. -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation Support Phone: 408-400-0550 _______________________________________________ Bug-cfengine mailing list [email protected] https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cfengine
