On Oct 29, 2009, at 2:12 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> Very long story short, I'm building rpms with 126.96.36.199 on ubuntu
> and need to install on RH 7.1 with rpm 4.0.2.
> When you have stopped laughing, here's the problem :)
> I need to tell rpm to never put a rpmlib(PartialHardlinkSets) in
> the rpms it builds.
No laughter. I've heard older and odder problems with RPM.
> When I add a hardlink in the rpm, rpm 188.8.131.52 "helpfully" adds a
> rpmlib(PartialHardlinkSets) that is not relevant to my case and
> installing the rpm on RH 7.1 when otherwise said rpm and hardlinks
> work just fine.
> Currently, the only way I found to fix this is:
> perl -pi -e 's|rpmlib\(PartialHardlinkSets\)|rpmlib
> (CompressedFileNames)|' scripts-1.1.20091028-0.i386.rpm
> perl -pi -e 's|8846d64e6f6f85e7d6613958acc0a9a1464ad2ef|
> command #1: replace property with another one of the same string
> command #2: hand fix the SHA1 signature
Now I'm laughing ;-)
> I'm obviously hoping that there is a way to tell rpm 184.108.40.206 to just
> not bother with rpmlib(PartialHardlinkSets)?
> (yes, the rpm after I hack the property out, installs and works just
> fine in
> my use case)
The issue is a bit deeper than just changing configuration since
there's a whole installer behavior of RPM itself that is being tracked.
The reliable fix is to to just add a patch to rpm-220.127.116.11 to not
add the tracking dependency.
You can try (its very much not the right thing to do, but you are
already pretty desperate for a fix if patching digests) adding
in the same package to stub-out the Requires:. I won't bore you
with the details of why its not the right thing to do. But if
you can mask the Requires: by adding a Provides: you will
likely be able to install.
Another approach to masking the Requires: would be to patch
the Provides: into rpm-4.0.2.
But if you can't rebuild either version of RPM, well, its rather
hard to retrofit forward compatibility without changing code.
73 de Jeff
Received on Thu Oct 29 13:35:40 2009