summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-December/010429.html
blob: b23cbfcf8627cc782ac8a66b3056fe40d8e0c4e6 (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
<!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=%3C20111214191947.GA24773%40coneharvesters.com%3E">
   <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
   <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
   <LINK REL="Previous"  HREF="010418.html">
   <LINK REL="Next"  HREF="010440.html">
 </HEAD>
 <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
   <H1>[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?</H1>
    <B>Dan Fandrich</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=%3C20111214191947.GA24773%40coneharvesters.com%3E"
       TITLE="[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?">dan at coneharvesters.com
       </A><BR>
    <I>Wed Dec 14 20:19:48 CET 2011</I>
    <P><UL>
        <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="010418.html">[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?
</A></li>
        <LI>Next message: <A HREF="010440.html">[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?
</A></li>
         <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> 
              <a href="date.html#10429">[ date ]</a>
              <a href="thread.html#10429">[ thread ]</a>
              <a href="subject.html#10429">[ subject ]</a>
              <a href="author.html#10429">[ author ]</a>
         </LI>
       </UL>
    <HR>  
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 11:30:33AM +0000, Pascal Terjan wrote:
&gt;<i> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 09:14, Dan Fandrich &lt;<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">dan at coneharvesters.com</A>&gt; wrote:
</I>&gt;<i> &gt; I can understand that my particular case is unsupported, but I described
</I>&gt;<i> &gt; a different, supported, scenario that would also fail due to this problem.
</I>&gt;<i> &gt; To reiterate, a distribution upgrade from 1 to 2 (once it's finalized)
</I>&gt;<i> &gt; could involve urpmi first upgrading the perl-dependent package but avoid
</I>&gt;<i> &gt; installing the new perl itself until the end of the upgrade, which could be
</I>&gt;<i> &gt; hours or (if interrupted) days later.
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> During an upgrade urpmi starts by updating what it uses (perl, rpm,
</I>&gt;<i> few other things, itself) and then restarts.
</I>
That has nothing to do with the problem in general. This same issue could
occur with any package that relies on a newer library (even just a newer
point version) but without mentioning that newer library version as a
versioned require. That's the more general issue of which my perl-using
example was but one example.

&gt;<i> &gt; During the entirety of that time,
</I>&gt;<i> &gt; that package would be unusable. If that package happened to be a key CGI
</I>&gt;<i> &gt; script for a web site, the entire site would be down for that entire time.
</I>&gt;<i> 
</I>&gt;<i> That would not be prevented. The result would be that you need to
</I>&gt;<i> install thousands of packages in the same transaction as they are all
</I>&gt;<i> required by each other, and nothing would prevent your CGI from being
</I>&gt;<i> at the end of the transaction which will happen hours or days later.
</I>
All packages are not required by each other. On my system, 13% of packages
are leaves that nothing depends on. 15% depend on nothing other than
glibc, libstdc++ or bash. Another 14% have a single other dependency, in
most cases a tightly-coupled library built from the same source code. So
trying to argue that a transaction must install thousands of packages is
specious.  And RPM's installation sequence is designed to minimize the
window when software is unusable during an upgrade.

&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> Dan
</I></PRE>






























<!--endarticle-->
    <HR>
    <P><UL>
        <!--threads-->
	<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="010418.html">[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?
</A></li>
	<LI>Next message: <A HREF="010440.html">[Mageia-dev] How broken are RPM dependencies allowed to be?
</A></li>
         <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> 
              <a href="date.html#10429">[ date ]</a>
              <a href="thread.html#10429">[ thread ]</a>
              <a href="subject.html#10429">[ subject ]</a>
              <a href="author.html#10429">[ 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>