xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

rpm bookkeeping

To: "XFS: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: rpm bookkeeping
From: "D. Stimits" <stimits@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 19:46:30 -0600
Reply-to: stimits@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0rc3) Gecko/20020528
I just did a cvs update to 2.4.19, from 2.4.19-rc2. Apparently the cmd rpms are the same version, without any changes. Even so, I did a make cmd and ran "rpm -Uvh *" on the i386 subdirectory, most simply said the package was already installed (correct behavior I presume). When it got to dmapi-2.0.5-0, it seemed to not know itself. Every file in dmapi-2.0.5-0 (and dmapi-devel-2.0.5-0) said something similar to:

file /lib/libdm.so.0.0.4 from install of dmapi-2.0.5-0 conflicts with file from package dmapi-2.0.5-0
file /usr/include/xfs/dmapi.h from install of dmapi-devel-2.0.5-0 conflicts with file from package dmapi-devel-2.0.5-0
file /usr/lib/libdm.a from install of dmapi-devel-2.0.5-0 conflicts with file from package dmapi-devel-2.0.5-0
file /usr/lib/libdm.la from install of dmapi-devel-2.0.5-0 conflicts with file from package dmapi-devel-2.0.5-0


So this is harmless, but having dependencies in the rpm fail could end up causing some mystery behavior at a later date, when it does matter. Somehow it thinks the two same versions are different conflicting versions.

D. Stimits, stimits AT idcomm.com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>