I have a similar in intent spec - yum-pull-update. It is a little different
from your because
i also remove the rpm and yum lock and disable the rpm warning, probably
useless in this case.
I post if someone is also interested - unlikely.
Thanks for the replay
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Jeff Johnson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2008, at 4:03 AM, devzero2000 wrote:
>> Please, can you tell ? I am interested.
> As part of preparing for dealing with the incompatibilities
> that are going to be introduced by the "official" release
> of rpm-4.6.0 from rpm.org, I've started preparing my
> own rpm-4.6.0 packaging.
> I'm using a "package bundle" for several reasons, not
> the least of which is that I want to be able to install/erase
> all rpm-4.6.0 packaging as easily as possible.
> Attached is a rpm-bundle.spec file that accomplishes
> a "package bundle" for rpm-4.6.0. There's a bit
> more to do (dealing with rpm-4.6.0 incompatibilities)
> before sending the same "package bundle" example
> to <email@example.com>, but I don't believe there's anything
> in the attached rpm-bundle.spec that cannot be used right
> now, certainly illustrating what is needed to produce a
> "package bundle" is harmless.
> Note that interoperability between rpm.org <-> rpm5.org
> does not exist yet, waiting on the "official" rpm-4.6.0 release.
> Currently, there are different Berekeley DB versions in use, different
> fDB_HASH <-> DB_BTREE formats, and different /usr/lib/rpm/macros
> configuration that are most certainly incompatible atm.
> 73 de Jeff
Received on Thu Dec 18 19:06:44 2008