On Thursday 07 August 2003 10:04 am, Fran�ois Pons wrote: > w9ya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Hello gang; > > > > 1 - For me, I have been getting these results for a few days ro so, and > > with some packages well over a week. I feel uncomfortable defeating the > > deps and/or manually uninstalling such a large list of packages. So, I > > thought I would at least report these "pic-a-dillos". > > > > 2 - This update script is old, and recently (the past week or so) it has > > required several invocations to get all the packages that can be upgraded > > to upgrade. Is there a better script someone can suggest using ? > > > > Thanks in advance for your time. > > You have a better error report now in urpmi, look at man page, there are 4 > or 5 exit code just for installation failure report (missing files and/or > failed transaction). > > You may use these error code to exit correctly from your script. > > You may try the following option too --keep which avoid updating in order > not to remove existing package (only upgrade are allowed, this avoid using > --no-uninstall).
I am sorry, but I do not undersatand the English you are using here. I *do* want to update, and am not trying to "...avoid updating..." . > > Another method is to use urpmi --auto-select directly as there is now an > integrated split mechanism to avoid such a loop you use, furthermore the > split is done in a way the package are installed in right order to minimize > transaction size (which is not the case when using an urpmq --auto-select > output). Could you supply an appropriate example of such a script please ? Bob Finch > > Best Regards, > Fran�ois.
