On Aug 7, 2007, at 3:24 PM, Jakub Bogusz wrote:
On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 06:48:09PM +0200, Patryk Zawadzki wrote:So, is there anything against using feature-provides and conflicts (only for really conflicting packages)?Old packages should not be a problem if we rebuild all affected software.It is a problem as just rebuilding them don't force installing them on all existing machines. In such cases I propose changing package name Obsoletesto Conflicts: package-name < (E:V-R before Provides has been added).
If you want Conflicts: behavior instead of Obsoletes: (or vice versa), its rather trivial, like max 200 lines of code, to attach underlying semantic attributes, like persistence (ala Conflicts)
with discovery/autoerasenewer (like Obsoletes:). All I ask is a a clear consensus on what is desired in rpm ;-)
Also, you found a set of packages which are really mutually exclusive and installing more than one makes no sense: issue*. Just dropping Obsoletes makes an unresolved conflict in distribution (try poldek--verify=fileconflicts). I think P+O: issue-package (literally, virtualpackage with that name) is the way to go (keeping in mind previous paragraph).
And? Try --exclude=/bin/sh and see what breaks. Non-closure, or enforcing mutually exclusive, ain't exactly rocket science. Indeed, its an if statement
somewhere. hth 73 de Jeff
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
