On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 01:19:30PM +0200, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 12:53:35PM +0200, Michael Mraka wrote:
> > So to make things consistent I'd propose to fix
> > rpm -q --whatrequires H
> > which currently returns "none". And fix --whatsuggests, --whatrecommends,
> > etc.
> > to work the same way.
>
> Wait, don't make "rpm -q --whatrequires H" return richdep if richdep
> contains
> Requires: (G if H else I)
>
> The H package is on the "if" side, so it is not required. Either
> G or I is required. Putting H in the requires index (that's what
> you propose) will just mess up rpm's dependency solving.
Hmm, spoke too soon. I guess this is indeed a bug in rpm. It's true
that for
Requires: (G if H)
'G' and '!H' is put in the index, so that 'rpm -q --whatrequires G' will
return 'richdep' and 'rpm -q --whatrequires !H' will also return richdep.
But
Requires: (G if H else I)
is the same as
Requires: (G if H)
Requires: (I or H)
so *both* 'H' and '!H' need to be in the index. I.e., if we remove H we
need to make sure that I is installed and if we install H we need
to make sure that G is installed.
Cheers,
Michael.
--
Michael Schroeder m...@suse.de
SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}
_______________________________________________
Rpm-ecosystem mailing list
Rpm-ecosystem@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-ecosystem
