Hi Phil, Am 30.11.2010 um 22:04 schrieb Philip Brown: > On 11/30/10, Geoff Davis <[email protected]> wrote: >> ... >> How does the alternatives mechanism handle package upgrades of an existing >> package in the Linux world? If I recall, the RPM and Debian package managers >> have the concept of "upgrade" rather than "Uninstall" followed by "Install". > > I think that is a side issue; if we just focus on pure "install", the > central issue here becomes clearer. Please see below > >> I would assume therefore that the initial package installation order >> determines in perpetuity what package is preferred. This would certainly be >> the behavior that I would expect from the OpenCSW tools. > > well, it's exactly the opposite, from what you will get from a linux install. > Try the following, with names adjusted as appropriate, in your linux > distribution of choice that supports "alternatives":
Your example is for alternatives with different priorities. My example (and all the discussion) is about same priorities. > For what it's worth.. seeing as how it's "OUR" tool, so we can > customize how we like :), I could potentially see adding in some kind > of configuration option in our tool, that behaves in a "first come > first served" manner. However, given the common expectation out there > of hundreds of thousands of linux systems working in the exact > opposite way. They do not. Having an update-hook in pkg* would be the best solution for persistence, but feel free to work around that in the script. Best regards -- Dago _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
