---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: devzero2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 1:42 PM Subject: Re: [Rpm-maint] [PATCH] "%post -p /sbin/ldconfig" wrongly skipped To: Panu Matilainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
P.S. Did you send this question privately on purpose? Just for the record, I > wont mind if you reply back to / cc rpm-maint list. > No Panu, just an error of my mail client. Thanks for the reply. On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 8:41 AM, Panu Matilainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 19 Apr 2008, devzero2000 wrote: > > So for resolving this problem it is necessary to look the "new" dkpg > > trigger mechanism that rpm have from 1997 iirc ? Ok probably the name are > > similar but the function are different : i have to look at it in depth. > > > > Looking at dpkg triggers is hardly "necessary", but when somebody has > already put considerable effort to solving the same problem it'd be stupid > not to look at what they've done. > > The dpkg triggers are not to be confused with rpm triggers although some > similarities exist. If you look at the scrollkeeper example from the > specification, scrollkeeper package puts a trigger (or a watch, if you wish) > on /usr/share/omf/ directory: any package updating the contents of that > directory will activate that particular trigger (to run > scrollkeeper-update), but it'll run just once "when convenient" - convenient > would be for example once the transaction has otherwise finished. > > I haven't yet read the dpkg trigger specification in enough detail to > comment on the other forms, but the ide a of putting watches on files and > directories to execute something just once certainly seems like a useful > idea, rpm just needs some different terminology to avoid confusion with the > existing but different trigger mechanism. > > But if posttrans isn't perfect today but it can solve the issue > > why dosn't resolve the erasure problem in first place ? In every case it > > would be useful: a resolved problem is always an improvement. > > > > This seems a reasonable question. > > > > %posttrans, whether it runs for erased packages or not, is not the > solution to this problem. While we are talking about things that get run > most likely only after the transaction finishes, %posttrans != "anything > post transaction", it has it's own package-centric semantics. For example > the directory/file watch could run once all the involved packages have been > processed, which doesn't *have* to be after everything else has completed, > ie post transaction. > > To answer the question... that %posttrans doesn't run on erasures is a > kind of two-fold thing: > a) it's not intended to, there's supposed to be %postuntrans for that > b) not implemented due to rpm internal issues/limitations > > %postuntrans might get implemented some day, but it's not the answer to > this problem. > > P.S. Did you send this question privately on purpose? Just for the record, > I wont mind if you reply back to / cc rpm-maint list. > > - Panu - >
_______________________________________________ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org https://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint