Another unrelated question I had was about the -U flag in rpm/openpkg. Suppose I have 2 files deliverable in package
a-1.0.rpm 1.data (checksum xyxy) 2.data (checksum xxxz) Now I release the next release of 'a' i.e a-1.1.rpm with 3 files a-1.1.rpm 1.data (checksum xyxy) 2.data (checksum xxxz) 3.data (checksum xrws) Notice that the checksums for 1.data and 2.data are the same. If I upgrade from package a-1.0 to a-1.1 ... will 1.data and 2.data be deleted and over written or will they be left untouched ? Thanks, -ansh > -----Original Message----- > From: Ralf S. Engelschall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:37 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: FW: Trying to understand openpkg installroot > > > On Wed, Nov 05, 2003, Anshuman Kanwar wrote: > > > Thanks for your detailed reply. Very helpful. > > > > What if I build openpkg with : > > > > $ sh openpkg-***-***.src.sh --prefix=/ --user=here --group=here > > > > Will that break anything ? > > Yes, it _will_ break your system -- perhaps not in this steps, but at > least after you installed a few packages containing files similar to > what the system already has! Please don't do this until you > really want > to create a dedicated "OpenPKG OS" ;-) > > > Though I appreciate the ability to run multiple instances > of an app on one > > box, (This is one thing sadly missing in any other > packaging system ... and > > I've researched quite a few) my problem is that we run an > ASP environment > > and changing application paths at this point is just not an option. > > For customers at C&W which insist on particular paths we usually solve > the problem by just creating a few legacy symbolic links inside the > system area pointing to the OpenPKG area. Usually you don't need very > much legacy paths as experience shows. It is usually just about half a > dozend or so... > > > As far as deployment is concerned, I currently use an > overly infrastructure > > over ssh/scp to manage applications using push. I have a > good mind to move > > to using cfengine, but there are some timing issues we > faced while testing > > that. > > You should be able to integrate OpenPKG into this scheme without > problems, I think. > Ralf S. Engelschall > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.engelschall.com > > ______________________________________________________________________ > The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org > User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ______________________________________________________________________ The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
