summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-December/010419.html
blob: d70e02ab13c33bb550551302f7676dc6b1b77d08 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
 <HEAD>
   <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?
   </TITLE>
   <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
   <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20How%20broken%20are%20RPM%20dependencies%20allowed%20to%20be%3F&In-Reply-To=%3CCAONrEtY3hm4%2BBwM17b%3DdK0vb9AO9RbqV0rrSH%3DZ88OUv4jq_7Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E">
   <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
   <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
   <LINK REL="Previous"  HREF="010440.html">
   <LINK REL="Next"  HREF="010430.html">
 </HEAD>
 <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
   <H1>[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?</H1>
    <B>Thierry Vignaud</B> 
    <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20How%20broken%20are%20RPM%20dependencies%20allowed%20to%20be%3F&In-Reply-To=%3CCAONrEtY3hm4%2BBwM17b%3DdK0vb9AO9RbqV0rrSH%3DZ88OUv4jq_7Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E"
       TITLE="[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?">thierry.vignaud at gmail.com
       </A><BR>
    <I>Wed Dec 14 12:31:36 CET 2011</I>
    <P><UL>
        <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="010440.html">[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?
</A></li>
        <LI>Next message: <A HREF="010430.html">[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?
</A></li>
         <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> 
              <a href="date.html#10419">[ date ]</a>
              <a href="thread.html#10419">[ thread ]</a>
              <a href="subject.html#10419">[ subject ]</a>
              <a href="author.html#10419">[ author ]</a>
         </LI>
       </UL>
    <HR>  
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>On 14 December 2011 10:14, Dan Fandrich &lt;<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">dan at coneharvesters.com</A>&gt; wrote:
&gt;<i> I can understand that my particular case is unsupported, but I described
</I>&gt;<i> a different, supported, scenario that would also fail due to this problem.
</I>&gt;<i> To reiterate, a distribution upgrade from 1 to 2 (once it's finalized)
</I>&gt;<i> could involve urpmi first upgrading the perl-dependent package but avoid
</I>&gt;<i> installing the new perl itself until the end of the upgrade, which could be
</I>&gt;<i> hours or (if interrupted) days later.
</I>
This is bullshit.
urpmi will upgrade perl itself first (with glibc, rpm &amp; perl-URPM).

&gt;<i> During the entirety of that time,
</I>&gt;<i> that package would be unusable. If that package happened to be a key CGI
</I>&gt;<i> script for a web site, the entire site would be down for that entire time.
</I>
This is totally unrealistic.
If someone is fool enough to perform a live upgrade on a server
still serving requests, it deserves being shoot. Twice.
One usually pulls a server out of trafic, upgrade it, then put it back
in use. And keeps HA by keeping another old server responding.
That's not a valid use case.

&gt;&gt;<i> Installing packages individually from one release on another release is not
</I>&gt;&gt;<i> supported. Either upgrade the entire distro first, or stick to packages from
</I>&gt;&gt;<i> the version you are on. However 'upgrade from release to Cauldron', when done
</I>&gt;&gt;<i> correctly, should usually work as expected.
</I>&gt;<i>
</I>&gt;<i> Yes, &quot;usually&quot;. Is Mageia the operating system that works reliably 95% of the
</I>&gt;<i> time?
</I>
This will break on every distro.

&gt;&gt;<i> But, in supported use cases, urpmi *does* ensure that all the pieces to keep
</I>&gt;&gt;<i> urpmi are upgraded in one transaction.
</I>&gt;<i>
</I>&gt;<i> But only if the dependencies are set correctly. And my original bug report on
</I>&gt;<i> that has just now been closed as WONTFIX.
</I>
Once again, your report has nothing to do with urpmi.
Urpmi doesn't depends on quite a lot of packages and
it WILL upgrade them first then restart.
</PRE>




































<!--endarticle-->
    <HR>
    <P><UL>
        <!--threads-->
	<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="010440.html">[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?
</A></li>
	<LI>Next message: <A HREF="010430.html">[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?
</A></li>
         <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> 
              <a href="date.html#10419">[ date ]</a>
              <a href="thread.html#10419">[ thread ]</a>
              <a href="subject.html#10419">[ subject ]</a>
              <a href="author.html#10419">[ author ]</a>
         </LI>
       </UL>

<hr>
<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev
mailing list</a><br>
</body></html>