Not checking for installed RPMs would be fairly simple to implement. However, that's not the way it's done in real life -- there you have a seed set of RPMs the form a minimal core to allow rpm(1) to do it's job. We clearly have those things available to us as the image build process does that now. This is a better approach, as we're closer to actual practice, rather than trying to invent some other mechanism.
I'll take a look at that. I'll also take a look at ignoring the installed base, if that's truly as simple a fix as I think it is, then I'll do that too, so we can at least try it out -- better to pick from two alternatives than one. Both approaches will fit well in the current code design. -- David N. Lombard My comments represent my opinions, not those of Intel Corporation. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:oscar-devel- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Brechin > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 6:27 AM > To: Jeff Squyres > Cc: OSCAR development > Subject: Re: [Oscar-devel] Client image > > I thought I remembered seeing some option in update-rpms to ignore the > filesystem and just check deps based on listed packages. > > Dave? > > Jason > > > On Thu, 2004-05-13 at 23:28, Jeff Squyres wrote: > > Ok, a bunch of problems has been fixed. You can get all the way up > > through installing the server non-core RPMs (with a bunch of oda > > uninitialized variable warnings). But now we have a new problem. > > > > When building the client image, we get two lists of RPMs: the > > "oscarsample" RPM list for the distro and the list of RPMs from the > > packages. Previously, we just used all those RPMs to build the image, > and > > that was that. > > > > Recally, however, that per the Tuesday phone call, I've removed "libaio" > > from LAM's RPM list. So now the install-both-RPM-lists mechanism no > > longer works -- because the LAM RPM dependencies fail because libaio is > > missing. > > > > But wait -- DepMan should have caught this, right? > > > > Yikes! This is a place where DepMan integration was skipped. So I > added > > it. Buuutttt... not really. Here's the problem: > > > > update-rpms checks against both the cache and the installed system to > come > > up with a list of RPMs that need to be installed. Hence, you get a list > > of RPMs suitable passing to "rpm -ivh ...". > > > > But that's no good because we're checking against the root filesystem, > and > > therefore we don't get a "pure" list of RPMs to install into an image > > (i.e., there's lots of RPMs missing in the output because they're > already > > installed on the server). > > > > There's a chroot() function for DepMan so that you can check against > > images. But there's no image yet, so this is useless. :-\ > > > > Anyone got any ideas here? > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: SourceForge.net Broadband > Sign-up now for SourceForge Broadband and get the fastest > 6.0/768 connection for only $19.95/mo for the first 3 months! > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=2562&alloc_id=6184&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Oscar-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-devel ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: SourceForge.net Broadband Sign-up now for SourceForge Broadband and get the fastest 6.0/768 connection for only $19.95/mo for the first 3 months! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id%62&alloc_ida84&op=click _______________________________________________ Oscar-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-devel
