On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Jef Spaleta wrote:
Pekka Savola wrote:
> .. I upgraded between RHL72 and RHL73 using autoupdate, and the
> updating of RPM's is done basically by 'rpm -Uvh <long list of
RPMs>'.
done basically. by ...or done exactly by. I'm a bit suspicious that the
problem lies with the perl script autoupdate and not necessarily
rpm...
Basically, yes. Precisely, it calls 'rpm -Uvh --nodeps' on all packages
if 'rpm --test -U' on those packages was successful (I don't know why
nodeps in that case), otherwise it calls just 'rpm -U'. I don't recall
which was done in this particular case.
but you could certainly test whether its a problem with rpm.
I did not see wrong reordering (but in all fairness, the autoupdate was
250+ packets, I just tested the bare minimum of 4 here), at least
outright, but the fundamental problem still persisted. (The next message
in the thread.)
If you can rollback the changes you made then place the updates you
did
in a local directory then do rpm -Uvh or -Fvh on that local
directory..without using autoUpdate...you should be able to determine if
it is in fact a problem with rpm.
Well, yes, I can easily see the main problem, alternatives not being able
to run in sendmail's %post, with plain rpm as well.
But even if you do determine it is a bug in rpm....the version of
rpm
might not be so relevant to the current version in the fedora test
releases :->.
I haven't tried to simulate this.
--
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings