Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

> On Jun 8, 2016, at 5:58 AM, Tomasz Pala wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 00:10:36 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > >>> http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2008-February/001911.html >> >> OK, I???ll bite: you quote James Antill from 8 years ago ??? what are you >>

Re: rpm5 (Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs)

On 08.06.2016 15:03, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: Similarly, why should*I* (as the only active project developer0 use git when cvs is more than adequate for my own development purposes? GIT is great for large distributed active development projects, but all of “large”, “distributed” and “active” do

Re: rpm5 (Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs)

> On Jun 8, 2016, at 2:04 AM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > > On 08.06.2016 01:04, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >> (aside) >> I spent a week converting the entire @rpm5.org cvs repository to git >> last year at git.rpm.org. There has been exactly zero interest in accessing, >> too little

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 00:10:36 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >> http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2008-February/001911.html > > OK, I???ll bite: you quote James Antill from 8 years ago ??? what are you > trying to say? Please ??? > >> FS-level snapshots are shortest way to 'reboot to

rpm5 (Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs)

On 08.06.2016 01:04, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: (aside) I spent a week converting the entire @rpm5.org cvs repository to git last year at git.rpm.org. There has been exactly zero interest in accessing, too little interest to even contemplate switching the repository into "production" every day use

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

> On Jun 7, 2016, at 10:57 PM, Tomasz Pala wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 14:29:24 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > There are also better solutions than /var/spool/repackage that can be attempted these days. >>> >>> What are they? Filesystem-level

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 21:21:35 +0300, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: >>> >There are also better solutions than /var/spool/repackage that can be >>> >attempted these >>> >days. >> What are they? > > docker is one ;) How? Recently I've upgraded foo and after two weeks some problem emerged. How exactly

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 14:29:24 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >>> There are also better solutions than /var/spool/repackage that can be >>> attempted these >>> days. >> >> What are they? Filesystem-level snapshots are not suitable when you need >> to revert anything older than a few hours

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 21:31, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: Next time you can wait for proyvind to give you a patch to solve whatever rpm problem you report, if that is what you prefer. no i prefer rpm5 modernized it's contribution system, submitting patches to mailing list is so 90s. it should have

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

> On Jun 7, 2016, at 2:27 PM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > > On 07.06.2016 21:18, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >> Patches cheerfully accepted at > > seen how you bashed proyvind when he submitted his patches to the list! > 40% of pld patches originate from him.

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

> On Jun 7, 2016, at 2:07 PM, Tomasz Pala wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 13:42:23 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > >> There are also better solutions than /var/spool/repackage that can be >> attempted these >> days. > > What are they? Filesystem-level snapshots are not

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 21:18, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: Patches cheerfully accepted at seen how you bashed proyvind when he submitted his patches to the list! 40% of pld patches originate from him. do not want to go that path! -- glen

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 21:07, Tomasz Pala wrote: On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 13:42:23 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >There are also better solutions than /var/spool/repackage that can be attempted these >days. What are they? docker is one ;) -- glen ___

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 21:04, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: The spewage contains pam warning: /etc/security/limits.conf created as /etc/security/limits.conf.rpmnew warning: /etc/security/namespace.init created as /etc/security/namespace.init.rpmnew So the install did not install, the

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

> On Jun 7, 2016, at 1:58 PM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > > >> Meanwhile abandoning %config renaming (and doing a git check-in with >> RPM+LIBGIT2), >> is likely the best forward-looking solution. > pld will not sign up to this. %config handling needs to be fixed. Then PLD has its

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 20:42, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: On Jun 7, 2016, at 1:29 PM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: On 06.06.2016 22:00, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: (pld has --downgrade alias to --oldpackage via popt) downgrading from repackage lost config files, i.e saved them as .rpmsave leaving original

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

> On Jun 7, 2016, at 1:49 PM, Tomasz Pala wrote: > > Note: I'm not referring to %config issue reported, this is only by-the-way > question. > > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 13:16:45 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > >>> A propos - would it be possible for rpm to support "--verify

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

Note: I'm not referring to %config issue reported, this is only by-the-way question. On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 13:16:45 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >> A propos - would it be possible for rpm to support "--verify --package" >> exactly for this purpose, i.e. verifying metadata/manifest against

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

> On Jun 7, 2016, at 1:29 PM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > > On 06.06.2016 22:00, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: >> (pld has --downgrade alias to --oldpackage via popt) >> >> downgrading from repackage lost config files, >> i.e saved them as .rpmsave leaving original path missing > > remote

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 20:29, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: On 06.06.2016 22:00, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: (pld has --downgrade alias to --oldpackage via popt) downgrading from repackage lost config files, i.e saved them as .rpmsave leaving original path missing remote reproducer using docker: (commands that

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 06.06.2016 22:00, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: (pld has --downgrade alias to --oldpackage via popt) downgrading from repackage lost config files, i.e saved them as .rpmsave leaving original path missing remote reproducer using docker: (commands that Dockerfile runs are displayed on that page, so

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 10:00:38PM +0300, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > (pld has --downgrade alias to --oldpackage via popt) > > downgrading from repackage lost config files, > i.e saved them as .rpmsave leaving original path missing > It it the same directory: > # ls -l */*pam* > -rw-r--r-- 1 root

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 17:48, Jeff Johnson wrote: Sorry for not being precise. Yes the metadata header contains those files. Are the files in the payload? rpm2cpio *.rpm | cpio -itv If the files are not in the payload, then they will not be installed. yes. present: root@glen 1465233457/1#

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On Jun 7, 2016, at 10:45 AM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > On 07.06.2016 17:39, Jeff Johnson wrote: >> Were the files present on the file system (presumably not, but I'd like >> confirmation)? > yes of course they were present. otherwise there would not be messages from > rpm like: > > warning:

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On Jun 7, 2016, at 10:44 AM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > >> Do the repackaged rpm’s contain those files.? > > the config files are present in .rpm file and in rpmdb where i installed the > .rpm file: > > # rpm -qplvc 1465233457/pam-1.1.8-8.x86_64.rpm|grep auth > -rw-r--r--1 rootroot

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 17:39, Jeff Johnson wrote: Were the files present on the file system (presumably not, but I'd like confirmation)? yes of course they were present. otherwise there would not be messages from rpm like: warning: /etc/security/namespace.init saved as

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 17:31, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: ># ls -l */*pam* >-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 326K 6. juuni 20:17 1465233457/pam-1.1.8-8.x86_64.rpm >-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 35K 6. juuni 20:17 1465233457/pam-libs-1.1.8-8.x86_64.rpm > >root@glen spool/repackage# >root@glen spool/repackage# rpm -Uhv

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On Jun 7, 2016, at 10:37 AM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > On 07.06.2016 17:31, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >> Its still not clear to me whether the new package files were installed or >> not. > they were not > > mv -i will ask to overwrite files, it never asked ... so... > Yes I read the man page.

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 17:31, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: Its still not clear to me whether the new package files were installed or not. they were not mv -i will ask to overwrite files, it never asked ... so... -- glen ___ pld-devel-en mailing list

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

> On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:35 AM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > > On 07.06.2016 06:33, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >> I’m not sure how repackaged rpm’s are involved: that isn’t entirely clear >> from the report. > again, it was included in report that files were installed from repackage >

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 06:33, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: I’m not sure how repackaged rpm’s are involved: that isn’t entirely clear from the report. again, it was included in report that files were installed from repackage pool: # ls -l */*pam* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 326K 6. juuni 20:17

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On 07.06.2016 06:33, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: I see rpm renaming modified %config files to *.rpmsave exactly as always, nothing more. > >But doesn't install files that were to replace them. > Really? There is nothing in the e-mail report that indicates that files were not installed. i said in

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

> On Jun 6, 2016, at 11:04 PM, Tomasz Pala wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 17:00:23 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > >>> downgrading from repackage lost config files, >>> i.e saved them as .rpmsave leaving original path missing > [...] >> What exactly are you expecting? >

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 17:00:23 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: >> downgrading from repackage lost config files, >> i.e saved them as .rpmsave leaving original path missing [...] > What exactly are you expecting? If previous (modified) configs were moved to .rpmsave, anyone should expect

Re: rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

> On Jun 6, 2016, at 3:00 PM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > > (pld has --downgrade alias to --oldpackage via popt) > > downgrading from repackage lost config files, > i.e saved them as .rpmsave leaving original path missing > > # ls -l */*pam* > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 326K 6. juuni

rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

(pld has --downgrade alias to --oldpackage via popt) downgrading from repackage lost config files, i.e saved them as .rpmsave leaving original path missing # ls -l */*pam* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 326K 6. juuni 20:17 1465233457/pam-1.1.8-8.x86_64.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 35K 6. juuni 20:17