On 06/22/2012 12:10 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 22.06.2012 13:07, schrieb Andrew Haley: >> On 06/22/2012 11:44 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: >>> Andrew Haley writes: >>> >>>> On 06/22/2012 04:15 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: >>>>> The new perl package contains /usr/bin/perl. At upgrade, dependency >>>>> resolution is not smart enough to realize that the new package's >>>>> /bin/perl=/usr/bin/perl, causing a conflict. >>>> >>>> What exactly is the conflict? >>> >>> See the error from yum/rpm, that I posted. >> >> Oh, sorry, I tend to interpret "conflict" as meaning a conflict with another >> file, not a missing dependency. >> >> It seems to me that yum/rpm should know what package provides /bin/perl. >> This surely makes vastly more sense than changing default paths, which is >> just papering over the cracks > > since /bin and /sbin are now gone it is completly wrong have them in the PATH > and use them hardcoded in packages like GLIBC as also in any other package > with "Provides"
But we can't prevent them from being in the PATH, can we? All sorts of upstream packages might hard-code /bin:/usr/bin Why not take /bin and /sbin out of the default path *and* make sure that RPM knows about /bin/* ? > this is a bug because incomplete UsrMove Andrew. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
