Le Jeudi 27 Juin 2002 12:09, Fran�ois Pons a �crit :
> Philippe Coulonges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > for the same set of packages you select in rpmdrake and check if urpmi
> > > reports already installed packages.
> >
> > No, it does install the packages.
> > After that, the packages no more appears as "installable" in RPMdrake.
> > They do not reappear after reloading the list.
> >
> > So urpmi don't see the same versions as urpmq.
>
> So urpmi doesn't work or urpmi work ? This is not clear from your response.
I'll try to clarify.
lets say we have versions A and B of a package. A is the old version, B the
new one.
urpmq replies that B version is installed
urpmi install B version as if A was installed and never complains
rpmdrake indicates A version is installed, download the package, then
discovers that it is already installed.
Pertaining to urpmi, It clearly doesn't see that the package was installed,
but I can't say it doesn't work, as it corrects my buggy list.
On the other hand, rpmdrake does not correct the list. After discovering that
the package is installed, that package disappears from the upgradable
packages list, but it reappears at the next launch or a list update.
> If problem is really on urpmi, can you send me a compressed archive of
> --bug <dir> output given by urpmi.
I just don't understand what this means.
> Do you have the latest version of rpmdrake/urpmi ? (of cooker).
Yes. The entire host is up to date with cooker, except BasiliskII-jit
downgraded to 0.9.1.
CU
CPHIL
--
La th�orie, c'est quand on comprend tout mais que rien ne marche.
La pratique, c'est quand ca marche sans qu'on ne sache pourquoi.
Les ingenieurs rassemblent les deux:
rien ne marche et ils ne savent pas pourquoi.
-- ULg
