@j-mracek wrote elsewhere:
I know that this is not exactly about RPM6 format but it is related to a new
major version of RPM.
There are few things in our environment that are painful for our users but it
is not easy to resolve them:
- broken systems
- There are multiple ways how to get to that state and sometimes we have a
responsibility - lost power, interupted process, scriptlets, bug in DNF, rpm, ..
- There is no way how to easily revert the transaction or restore the
systems. It requires very skilled administrator and a lot of time for support
- Any improvement even small will make a difference
- DNF should improve history redo, undo operation
- Is there anything what RPM could improve? (more robust transaction,
recovery functionality, reverting transaction, ...)
- replacements of file, symlink, directories by each other during rpm upgrade
- I know that some of those operation are not supported and it makes problem
with downgrades
- files, symlinks, directories are mentioned as file in descriptions of
problems (file conflicts)
- it makes difficult debugging specially in case when symlink is going to be
replaced by directory and the operation fails.
- we would like to see reports more in structures then in string - to prevent
parsing of outputs - see in dnf.base.py - `def _trans_error_summary(self,
errstring):`
I understand that what I mentioned above is not easy to resolve, but I thing
that RPM6 is a good opportunity to look also in those directions.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2479
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/repo-discussions/2...@github.com>_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
