On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 21:19, Vox wrote: > This time Steve Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > becomes daring and writes: > > > On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 19:47, Vox wrote: > > > >> Easy to fix: > >> > >> rpm -e --justdb SuperFoo > > > > While that is certainly a solution, it seems like an awful nasty hack. > > (but thanks for the tip :) > > > > I would much prefer to see the tool remain smart. Really, why should it > > even care if unrelated dependencies are unresolved? It's kind of like > > getting into other people's business even though they didn't ask you to. > > (ok, maybe that's not the best analogy, but it's all I can think of) > > I actually like to think that urpmi getting old unresolved deps > flagged is A Good Thing(tm). If you don't care for deps, don't use a > package *manager*. > I must say I disagree here. He surely do care for deps and that --justdb trick is just like installing a tarball on an rpm system.
Leaving the SuperFoo in the rpm database allows to keep track of the installed files and remove them easily. There should be a way to tell urpmi to ignore a certain list of rpm and only deal with what it knows, i.e. what is in the hdlist. -- Quel Qun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
