seth vidal wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 16:08 +0100, Florian Festi wrote:
Easiest solution would be to return a list of (pkg, name, flag, (e,v,r))
tuples or a dict {pkg -> list of (n, f, (e,v,r))} (or use new Requires and
Conflicts objects). Even better would be to also pass flag and (e,v,r) to
the search methods. That way the sqlitesack could put as much intelligence
into the SQL queries as it wants to further reduce the amount of data being
processed.
the flags and evr for comparisons in SQL aren't the same as in rpm. So
passing them in won't help you.
ie: if I want foo > 1.1
It can't just look at the version field in the provides of the packages
db.
so we search names to get as close as we can and then do the search
using checkPrco.
I see absolutely no reason why this shouldn't be possible in the search
methods. Of course you would have to move the .inPrcoRange() code into the
package sack. In fact the rpmsack supports just that (whatProvides(),
whatRequires()).
If the sqlitesack and the transaction (as virtual sack representing the
future rpmdb) provide this interface, too, the resolver will look much
cleaner and changes on 'who searches where' will be much easier.
Florian
_______________________________________________
Yum-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
