Michael Schwendt wrote:
>>Similarly, there are much better ways how to query a package
for who
>>made it. Vendor and Packager information and signature are
>>available. Let's put them to good effect, please.
>>
>>
>Sure, let's use those too.
>
>But there is a real use to having it in the filename and EVR info,
>despite the fact that we're using the release tag for something it wasn't
>designed for.
>
>
There is no use for repo tags in EVR info.
sorry, i need an overview.
$ rpm --querytags
[...]
examples without repo-packages:
"filenames"
"name epoch:version.release"
"name ditribution vendor packager"
$ rpm -q kernel httpd squirrelmail xorg-x11
kernel-2.6.9-1.667
kernel-2.6.9-1.681_FC3
httpd-2.0.52-3.1
squirrelmail-1.4.3a-6.FC3
xorg-x11-6.8.1-12.FC3.21
$ rpm -q --qf "%{name}\n %{epoch} : %{version} . %{release} \n" kernel
httpd squirrelmail xorg-x11
kernel
(none) : 2.6.9 . 1.667
kernel
(none) : 2.6.9 . 1.681_FC3
httpd
(none) : 2.0.52 . 3.1
squirrelmail
(none) : 1.4.3a . 6.FC3
xorg-x11
(none) : 6.8.1 . 12.FC3.21
$ rpm -q --qf "%{name}\n %{distribution}\n %{vendor}\n %{packager}\n\n"
kernel httpd squirrelmail xorg-x11
kernel
Red Hat (FC-3)
Red Hat, Inc.
Red Hat, Inc. <
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla>
kernel
Red Hat (FC-3)
Red Hat, Inc.
Red Hat, Inc. <
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla>
httpd
Red Hat (FC-3)
Red Hat, Inc.
Red Hat, Inc. <
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla>
squirrelmail
Red Hat (FC-3)
Red Hat, Inc.
Red Hat, Inc. <
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla>
xorg-x11
Red Hat (FC-3)
Red Hat, Inc.
Red Hat, Inc. <
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla>
--
shrek-m