smart package mgr question?

[Axel Thimm]

On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 11:31:15AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > RPM is not designed for downgrades
> 
> >One of the core features of rpm from the very beginning was to
> >downgrades and uninstalls so the user is able to revert from a bad
> >package. So rpm does indeed support downgrades by design.
> 
> Except that there is no proper way to revert back changes that is done 
> through install scripts or triggers and what not. There is also the 
> thing that QA is never done on downgrades.

Packages can be broken, of course, and any package installing itself
in an inrevocable way in scriplets that isn't undone by %*un scripts
is usually broken irrespective of downgrade or upgrades. You can also
have broken packages breaking upgrade paths, and we have a large list
of such existing examples.

In short broken packages don't indicate any (missing) abilities in
rpm itself. Otherwise for each feature of rpm we could find a broken
package and we'd conclude that rpm is designed for nothing. ;)
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20061001/967ca370/attachment-0002.bin