On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 04:07:13AM +0100, Paul Jakma wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
>>But that doesnt allow higher-level package management systems to
>>spot such dependencies though.
>
>How that would be really different?
Because the refcount would be a dependency, but that dependency isn't
expressed anywhere, hence it's invisible to yum. The problem is
similar to the dependency chain you noted in a previous mail, except
your package management system can't see it and can't do anything
about it.
X.i386 -> Y.i386 (X depends on Y)
A.x86-64 -> Y.x86-64
No, this does not work that way. If you have A.i386 and A.x86_64
installed, and they do have common files, then an attempt to update
only one from this pair ends up with conflicts. Seth already
suggested that yum may have a "pair check" which woud allow either
both updates or none.
X.x86-64 is to be upgraded, and depends on a newer version of
Y.x86-64, which is pulled in and upgraded.
Here you really have A.i386, A.x86_64, and Common.noarch. Both As
depend on Common. If you will try to update only, say, A.x86_64
this will force an update of Common which will cause "broken
dependencies" error for a change unless you are updating A.i386 as
well. So what is the real gain? Do you plan to loosen up
dependencies on Common? That would open a gate to real horrors.
Michal