On Mon, 22 Mar 2004, Kelson Vibber wrote: > I don't think it's a failing of RPM so much as it's a failing of package > managers in general - namely, if you install anything that the PM doesn't > know about, it acts as if it isn't there. The only way you can get around > that is if you can override the PM and tell it, "Look, Perl's really > installed. I know I can't tell you in detail where all the files are, or > what libraries and utilities it depends on, but it's installed, honest!"
See I was thinking Portage could do just this. Note however that I haven't yet gotten a chance to try it, but I'm getting closer. Perhaps it would be better to build a system that maintains a detail file on what the package manage expects to find (or has to find) to be able to say that yes, Package A is actually installed so I can add it to my internal DB. That way even if you download and compile by hand you could tell your package manager that Package A is really installed and the package manager could use the detail file to confirm that. It's a possibility. This way the detail file is distributed in portage and portage has a chance to confirm that the package is installed rather than taking our word for it. Hmm... interesting... Justin _______________________________________________ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
