On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Jan Rękorajski
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
>> >> $ LC_ALL=C sudo rpm -Uhv systemd-187-4.x86_64.rpm
>> >> systemd-libs-187-4.x86_64
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> >> $ LC_ALL=C sudo rpm -Uhv systemd-187-4.x86_64.rpm
> >> systemd-libs-187-4.x86_64.rpm systemd-units-187-4.x86_64.rpm
> >> udev-core-187-4.x86_64.rpm
On Sep 13, 2012, at 7:28 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>
>> But this isn't the time/pace to discuss relative merits
>> of user/group management … the rpmdsCompare needs to
>> be extended to include the namespace in the comparison.
>
> Would something li
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> But this isn't the time/pace to discuss relative merits
> of user/group management … the rpmdsCompare needs to
> be extended to include the namespace in the comparison.
Would something like this do the job (works-for-me)?
Or is it too simplified?
--
On Sep 12, 2012, at 2:56 AM, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:06:45PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>> There's no well defined semantic for
>> Provides: group(mpd)
>> even if PLD has adopted some convention afaik. The
>> Provides: group(mpd)
>> is just a string and (
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:06:45PM -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> There's no well defined semantic for
> Provides: group(mpd)
> even if PLD has adopted some convention afaik. The
> Provides: group(mpd)
> is just a string and (imho) should be removed
> if there are problems unless there
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>
> On Sep 11, 2012, at 5:22 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Any idea why the code above isn't being traversed? I'm
> >> missing something here, any help appreciated.
> >
> > dep in question is of the TYPE_VERSION here, comes from package bein
On Sep 11, 2012, at 5:22 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
>>
>> Any idea why the code above isn't being traversed? I'm
>> missing something here, any help appreciated.
>
> dep in question is of the TYPE_VERSION here, comes from package being
> installed and it is 'mpd < 0.16.5-4'
> 'group(mpd)' comes
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>
> On Sep 11, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
>
> >>
> >
> > No, it's this piece of code in rpmlib lib/depends.c:~1450:
> >
>
> Got it …
>
> >mi = rpmtsInitIterator(ts, RPMTAG_PROVIDENAME, Name, 0);
> >(void) rpmmiPrune(m
On Sep 11, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
>>
>
> No, it's this piece of code in rpmlib lib/depends.c:~1450:
>
Got it …
>mi = rpmtsInitIterator(ts, RPMTAG_PROVIDENAME, Name, 0);
>(void) rpmmiPrune(mi,
>ts->removedPackages, ts->numRemovedPackag
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>
> On Sep 11, 2012, at 2:29 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> >
> >> On Sep 11, 2012, at 6:58 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> >>
>
> $ rpm -q rpm
> rpm-5.4.10-0.12.x86_64
> >>>
> >>> The pro
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> On Sep 11, 2012, at 6:58 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
>
> >>
> >> $ rpm -q rpm
> >> rpm-5.4.10-0.12.x86_64
> >
> > The problem comes from mpd and stunnel have Provides user(%{name}) and
> > group(%{name}), and rpm mixes RPMNS_TYPE_USER/RPMNS_TYPE_GROU
On Sep 11, 2012, at 2:29 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>
>> On Sep 11, 2012, at 6:58 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
>>
$ rpm -q rpm
rpm-5.4.10-0.12.x86_64
>>>
>>> The problem comes from mpd and stunnel have Provides user(%{name}) and
>>> g
On Sep 11, 2012, at 6:58 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
>>
>> $ rpm -q rpm
>> rpm-5.4.10-0.12.x86_64
>
> The problem comes from mpd and stunnel have Provides user(%{name}) and
> group(%{name}), and rpm mixes RPMNS_TYPE_USER/RPMNS_TYPE_GROUP namespace
> deps with RPMNS_TYPE_VERSION(?) causing P:grou
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
>
> > On 11.09.2012 13:58, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> > > On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Jan Rękorajski
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Artur F
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
> On 11.09.2012 13:58, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Jan Rękorajski
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> $ LC_ALL=C sudo rpm -Uhv systemd-187-4.
On 11.09.2012 13:58, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
$ LC_ALL=C sudo rpm -Uhv systemd-187-4.x86_64.rpm
systemd-libs-187-4.x86_64.rpm systemd-units-187-4.x86_64.rpm
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> >> $ LC_ALL=C sudo rpm -Uhv systemd-187-4.x86_64.rpm
> >> systemd-libs-187-4.x86_64.rpm systemd-units-187-4.x86_64.rpm
> >> udev-core-187-4.x86_64.rpm
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
>> $ LC_ALL=C sudo rpm -Uhv systemd-187-4.x86_64.rpm
>> systemd-libs-187-4.x86_64.rpm systemd-units-187-4.x86_64.rpm
>> udev-core-187-4.x86_64.rpm udev-libs-187-4.x86_64.rpm
>> udev-initrd-187-4.x86_
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Brand new rpm 5.4.10 will be available for testing in th-test later today.
> > It has not been installed on our infrastructure yet, there is no poldek
> > for it on ftp[1], but we need it
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> Hi,
> Brand new rpm 5.4.10 will be available for testing in th-test later today.
> It has not been installed on our infrastructure yet, there is no poldek
> for it on ftp[1], but we need it to be publicly available before making
> it our new
On Sep 7, 2012, at 4:26 PM, Paweł Gołaszewski wrote:
>
> It shouldn't be a big problem to implement running that command as
> --rebuilddb, right?
>
Not sure what you are asking: the --rebuilddb
option can be run, just not going to help/hurt anything.
The --rebuilddb has been mis-used foreve
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>
> On Sep 7, 2012, at 7:15 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
>
> > Instalation instructions:
> >
> > 0) backup rpm database in /var/lib/rpm
> > 1) rpm -Fvh rpm* (obviously)
> > 2) run /usr/lib/rpm/bin/dbconvert
> > 3) run rpm --rebuilddb
> >
>
> That's th
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> > Brand new rpm 5.4.10 will be available for testing in th-test later
> > today. It has not been installed on our infrastructure yet, there is
> > no poldek for it on ftp[1], but we need it to be publicly available
> > before making it our new package
On Sep 7, 2012, at 7:15 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> Hi,
> Brand new rpm 5.4.10 will be available for testing in th-test later today.
> It has not been installed on our infrastructure yet, there is no poldek
> for it on ftp[1], but we need it to be publicly available before making
> it our new pa
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 01:15:09PM +0200, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> Hi,
> Brand new rpm 5.4.10 will be available for testing in th-test later today.
> It has not been installed on our infrastructure yet, there is no poldek
> for it on ftp[1], but we need it to be publicly available before making
> it
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Brand new rpm 5.4.10 will be available for testing in th-test later today.
> > It has not been installed on our infrastructure yet, there is no poldek
> > for it on ftp[1], but we need it
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
> Hi,
> Brand new rpm 5.4.10 will be available for testing in th-test later today.
> It has not been installed on our infrastructure yet, there is no poldek
> for it on ftp[1], but we need it to be publicly available before making
> it our new
Hi,
Brand new rpm 5.4.10 will be available for testing in th-test later today.
It has not been installed on our infrastructure yet, there is no poldek
for it on ftp[1], but we need it to be publicly available before making
it our new package manager.
So, please test if it works as expected and is
29 matches
Mail list logo
