On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:33:24 -0500, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>>>Jeff Johnson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Try with rpm -i.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Yeah OK. How about something that would be understood by depsolvers then ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Depsolvers (at least correctly written ones) use Provides:, not Name:,
>>for choosing
>>what packages to install.
>>
>>
>
>We need to support what we do have right now. And neither Yum nor
>"rpm -Uvh" would _not_ upgrade package libfoo to a newer libfoo.
>
From multiply installed rpm -i? Sure, no application gets that right.
No. The scenario is like this:
Installed is: libfoo-0.9-3 (which provides libfoo.so.0)
Packager releases: libfoo-1.0-1 (which provides libfoo.so.1)
Then "rpm -ivh libfoo-1.0-1.i386.rpm" works just fine and installs the
new library package in parallel, provided that no file conflicts
between libfoo-0.9-3 and libfoo-1.0-1 exist. On the contrary, "rpm
-Uvh libfoo-1.0-1.i386.rpm" and "yum -y update" would get rid of the
old libfoo, running into broken dependencies if other installed
packages still require the libfoo.so.0 soname.
>It's not different from what we've done in fedora.us
packages.
>Include parts of the soname version in the package name to make
>multiple library versions coexist nicely, i.e. also during upgrades.
>Package resolvers pick the right package based on automatic
>Provides/Requires.
>
>
So put sonames into package names if that floats your fedora.us boat.
Sooner or later you
will run into kernel file system imposed limits on package file names.
<shrug>
<sigh>