On Monday 21 July 2003 16:38, Olivier Thauvin wrote: > I just finnish the code fix about this in distlint
Great! > (I add check, check > always more check, it become very slow...), but I discover an interesting > things. > After test, It report a lot of rpm obsoleting theirself, for example zebra, > then i check why. Yes, I should have mentioned this. The first change I made to my script (well, the second; the first was to make it read the list once rather than call urpmf O(n^2) times...) was to take care of this issue. It does seem a bit conceptually weird to me when a package obsoletes itself (wouldn't it make more sense to "Obsolete: foo < %version"?), but since there's no harm done, I decided it was better not to focus only on the handful of packages where there was an actual problem in practice. > I have a workaround, do not report when a rpm obsolete itself except when > it obsolete it %name (this last case is not normal, a new version obsoletes > an older of course). I didn't think about that special case (because I never saw it happen), but that sounds like it should be flagged. > Rpm sucks... you allready know that... Yes, but then linux sucks too. For that matter, computers suck.... All we can do is make it suck less (or move to a shack in Montana and mail out letterbombs).
