On Mon, Jul 01, 2002 at 08:08:40PM +0200, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> But my point was why have two different tools here, if urpmq should exaclty
> mimic urpmi except actual rpm installation ?
Or why not just do something like what sendmail does for mailque? Just
make urpmq a symlink to urpmi and
Le Lundi 1 Juillet 2002 18:50, François Pons a écrit :
> Guillaume Rousse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > This is a limitation for urpmq because it is not interactive.
> >
> > If the goal is just to have a what-if tool, what about dropping urpmq and
> > adding a --dry-run option to urpmi instead
Guillaume Rousse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This is a limitation for urpmq because it is not interactive.
> If the goal is just to have a what-if tool, what about dropping urpmq and
> adding a --dry-run option to urpmi instead ?
dry run :-)
I can add interactivity to urpmq so...
François
Le Lundi 1 Juillet 2002 09:08, François Pons a écrit :
> Guillaume Rousse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Shouldn't urpmq act as 'what would have similar urpmi command done ?'
> > However, it is obviously different:
> > [root@silbermann guillaume]# urpmq squirrelmail
> > squirrelmail
> > [root@sil
Borsenkow Andrej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As it looks like it does use alternatives now:
>
> %changelog
> * Fri Jun 28 2002 Yves Duret <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2.50.3-3mdk
> - use update-alternatives.
> - use %%serverbuild.
Yes, that what I seen, I didn't check release before exactly.
> But it
>
> Borsenkow Andrej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > What surprised me was no explicit conflicts from ssmtp or postfix
(or
> > > even squiremail).
> >
> > I am not sure I understand.
> >
> > bor@cooker% rpm -q --conflicts ssmtp
> > sendmail
> > postfix
> > bor@cooker% rpm -q ssmtp
> > ssmtp-
Borsenkow Andrej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What surprised me was no explicit conflicts from ssmtp or postfix (or
> > even squiremail).
>
> I am not sure I understand.
>
> bor@cooker% rpm -q --conflicts ssmtp
> sendmail
> postfix
> bor@cooker% rpm -q ssmtp
> ssmtp-2.50.3-2m
> Borsenkow Andrej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > ssmtp conflicts with both sendmail and postfix because it installs
> > /usr/sbin/sendmail. Is it really squirrelmail requires ssmtp?
> >
> > Ssmtp can of course be changed to use alternatives. Any takers?
>
> What surprised me was no explicit
Borsenkow Andrej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ssmtp conflicts with both sendmail and postfix because it installs
> /usr/sbin/sendmail. Is it really squirrelmail requires ssmtp?
>
> Ssmtp can of course be changed to use alternatives. Any takers?
What surprised me was no explicit conflicts from
> > Shouldn't urpmq act as 'what would have similar urpmi command done
?'
> > However, it is obviously different:
> > [root@silbermann guillaume]# urpmq squirrelmail
> > squirrelmail
> > [root@silbermann guillaume]# urpmi squirrelmail
> > Some package have to be removed for others to be upgraded:
Guillaume Rousse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Shouldn't urpmq act as 'what would have similar urpmi command done ?'
> However, it is obviously different:
> [root@silbermann guillaume]# urpmq squirrelmail
> squirrelmail
> [root@silbermann guillaume]# urpmi squirrelmail
> Some package have to be r
11 matches
Mail list logo
