* Erik Troan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [001024 13:00]: > > Versions matter. The filesystem does not contain versioning information, > and you're dead w/o it. You can ignore versioning as long as you like but > this problem won't go away. >
I don't understand what you mean. Why can't you look for specific versions of libraries based on a file naming convention? If you're talking about applications, that definitely is a problem, but it is not an insoluble one, IMO. Since we would be defining the procedure with which to install applications, we simply need to add a stop to deposit version information into a database according to a naming convention that we define. If LSB wants to standardize on the RPM database for that purpose, fine. I have no problem with that, as long as we make the information generic enough so that it doesn't tell the installation program "You need this other RPM file to resolve the dependency". That's the whole problem with RPM. What the installation program really needs to find in the database is something more like "You have Apache 2.x.x installed" or "You need to have Apache 2.x.x installed but it isn't here". Not "You need apache-2.x.x-i386.rpm" If that generic info is already in the RPM database, great - let's define some naming standards on so that everyone can expect to understand the information already in the database. That way other installation methods can use that information to resolve dependencies regardless of the package format. But note that this database version information would be IN ADDITION TO the search through the actual system - not a replacement for it. -Nick -- ********************************************************** Nicholas Petreley Caldera Systems - LinuxWorld/InfoWorld [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.petreley.com - Eph 6:12 ********************************************************** .
