On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 01:19:19PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
We have a policy that forbids non-explicit file conflicts, yes.
I thought it applied to regular conflicts, now I see in the document
there are some exceptions allowed.
If you have two pkgs and you know foo owns a file that bar also owns
-
you are obligated to put an explicit conflict in place.
That might be a nice createrepo feature to add such conflicts.
The reason why yum doesn't detect them is b/c the metadata about
files
does not include color and checksum (mainly b/c if we did include that in
the filelists metadata it would be outrageously large) If the satsolver
is going to detect those then it will have to be AFTER it downloads all
the rpms.
Do you see what I mean?
Yes, but that's not what I'm talking about. I mean the explicit
conflicts between current versions of packages. I.e. the thing that
makes the complexity exponential.
For example:
package A: depends on X
package B: conflicts with D
package C: provides X
package D: provides X
yum install A B fails here as it tries to install A B D. The solution
is to install A B C.
--
Miroslav Lichvar