Thanks, this helps. ~ CHris
___
Yum-devel mailing list
Yum-devel@lists.baseurl.org
http://lists.baseurl.org/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 17:03 +0200, Florian Festi wrote:
> Seth Vidal wrote:
> > the parser omits them b/c they aren't REAL dependencies. They are added
> > by rpm to note whether or not the running version of rpm can interact
> > with the pkgs at all.
> >
> > But they are not deps that are 'sati
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Seth Vidal wrote:
We've discussed putting them in the repomd.xml so you know that "this repo"
needs this set of rpm capabilities. just to avoid dumping a lot of mindless
metadata here.
but, again, the BEST CASE is that you have to stop what the user wants to do,
see
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Florian Festi wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
the parser omits them b/c they aren't REAL dependencies. They are added by
rpm to note whether or not the running version of rpm can interact with the
pkgs at all.
But they are not deps that are 'satisfied' in anyway.
either the
Seth Vidal wrote:
the parser omits them b/c they aren't REAL dependencies. They are added
by rpm to note whether or not the running version of rpm can interact
with the pkgs at all.
But they are not deps that are 'satisfied' in anyway.
either the running version of rpm can do those things or
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, christopher floess wrote:
Hi, when I run rpm -qp --requires, I noticed that there are two lines
that are missing in primary.xml under the tag
Here is the rpm command
$ rpm -qp --requires nano-2.0.6-4.fc9.i386.rpm
/bin/sh
/bin/sh
/sbin/install-info
/sbin/install-info
lib
Hi, when I run rpm -qp --requires, I noticed that there are two lines
that are missing in primary.xml under the tag
Here is the rpm command
$ rpm -qp --requires nano-2.0.6-4.fc9.i386.rpm
/bin/sh
/bin/sh
/sbin/install-info
/sbin/install-info
libc.so.6
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1)
lib
