RPM Community Forums

Mailing List Message of <rpm-devel>

Re: ordering issues

From: Jeff Johnson <n3npq@mac.com>
Date: Thu 13 Jan 2011 - 19:00:53 CET
Message-id: <F126B8D5-64D4-4D9D-A58F-58369C7C410B@mac.com>

On Jan 13, 2011, at 12:16 PM, Per Řyvind Karlsen wrote:

> 2011/1/13 Jeff Johnson <n3npq@mac.com>:
>> On Jan 13, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Per Řyvind Karlsen wrote:
>>>>>> Well, I dunno at which time it might've changed, but with rpm 4.6
>>>>>> Requires(pre,prein,post,postun): were sorted to be ordered before
>>>>>> Requires:, which is something the packaging in cooker has been heavily
>>>>>> relying on..
>>>> If this is true, then point me at the code that sorts Requires(foo): before Requires:.
>>> I wish I could point to the specific code, but wrapping my head around
>>> lib/order.c isn't that easy, otherwise I'd probably just jack the code
>>> in question and be done with it already rather than asking for help
>>> here.. ;)
>> Hint: What you suggested, that Requires(pre): etc are sorted before Requires:,
>> has never been implemented in RPM. Or show me the code and prove me wrong ;-)
> Well, I wish I could, here's the last rpm-4.6.1-5 package that was in
> cooker before the switch though:
> http://svn.mandriva.com/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/packages/cooker/rpm/releases/1:4.6.1/5mnb2/
> For it not being implemented, would it be a sane behaviour that's
> feasible to implement?

Anything can be implemented.

is pointless. all relations are PreReq: re-adding a bit just adds
complexity but solves nothing: if all relations are semantically
PreReq: why does there need to be a RPMSENSE_PREREQ bit at all?

And this patch
attempting to make
	PreReq: == Requires(pre)
is just wrong.

But you got one degree of freedom to queue packages while 
Add whatever logic you want. The killer is demonstrating
	Do no harm.

  • application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Thu Jan 13 19:01:31 2011
Driven by Jeff Johnson and the RPM project team.
Hosted by OpenPKG and Ralf S. Engelschall.
Powered by FreeBSD and OpenPKG.