2011/7/12 Jeff Johnson <n3...@mac.com>:
>
> On Jul 12, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote:
>
>> 2011/7/12 Jeff Johnson <n3...@mac.com>:
>>> This isn't at all the right approach because
>>> its doesn't scale.
>>>
>>> You have changed a single high performing rpmdb
>>> access that applies patterns to keys only, and added
>>> a hack-o-round that then goes and loads multiple
>>> headers repeatedly to try and adjust the set
>>> returned by the original access to fit some desired
>>> semantic goal.
>>>
>>> You need to figure a better *RE pattern, not whack in
>>> lots of gunky code to "fix it somehow".
>> Yes, I kinda suspected this certainly wasn't the most optimal
>> way to solve this.. :|
>>
>> The problem basically is that it's doing comparision of RPMTAG_NVRA
>> between the installed packaged and the package to be installed, which
>> will give us problems when only distepoch differs since RPMTAG_NVRA
>> still isn't consistent with %___NVRA.
>>
>
> There's a fundamental confusion here between "identification"
> and versioning (as used in assertion checking).
>
> The %___NVRA is there purely for "identification". Whatever
> elements you wish to add/delete in a chosen "identification"
> string can be added at will. One can also undertake encoding
> conversions, and attaching other data, from sources not
> just derived from *.rpm metadata contents if you wish to
> go to the trouble of adding a header tag/format extension
> (which can be done without changing one line of RPM code
> if necessary).
>
> OTOH, versioning is hierarchical, and depends on a sequence
> of comparison operations applied to well defined data, done
> strictly in the same order, with choices for results when
> missing (as in not present or empty, different meanings for
> "missing").
>
>> ie. for:
>> foo-1-1-mdv2011.0.x86_64 vs foo-1-1-mdv2012.0.x86_64,
>> NVRA will be 'foo-1-1.x86_64' for both.
>>
>> So any good suggestions on performing the check on distepoch in addition
>> without heavy drawbacks?
>
> The very simplest solution is
> Call rpmtsRun() with RPMPROB_FILTER_REPLACEPACKAGE set.
> That is what the flag is implemented and intended for.
>
> The next most simple fix starts to address a design flaw:
> A sanity check on the elements in a transaction set
> needs to be done somewhere else instead. Checking
> in rpmtsRun() is far far far too late todo anything
> but "best effort" fudging or bizarre FULLSTOP termination,
> All of the checks, not just the *_REPLACEPKG check we happen to
> be discussing, are total bullshit: if the check finds something
> wrong, well, its some programmer's brain fart choosing what
> packages to add to a transaction, not anything else.
>
> But if you simply MUST fix *_REPLACEPG, then the right fix is to
> change rpmdbMireApply() to not use the "identification" RPMTAG_NVRA
> string but rather construct whatever tag tests one wishes however
> one wants. Post processing fiddle ups (like you just checked in)
> to "correct" a call that should have been done differently are silly
> band-aids.
>
>> Checking distepoch of the package to be installed is easy and fast enough
>> with rpmteD(p), but any chance of providing distepoch with the keys returned
>> by rpmdbMireApply on RPMTAG_NVRA in some way..?
>>
>
> Um, not true: rpmteD is a simple getter, does no checking whatsoever,
> so I have no idea how easy/fast applies to something that isn't being done.
>
> Passing keys Somewhere Else Instead isn't needed either: rpmdbMireApply()
> is perfectly capable of being used intelligently, to perform a bullshit
> test that isn't necessary at all, however you wish.
Would this be more acceptable? :)
--- transaction.c 2011-07-12 11:50:34.229520174 +0200
+++ /home/peroyvind/RPM/rpm/BUILD/rpm-5.3.12/lib/transaction.c
2011-07-13 19:52:43.668223410 +0200
@@ -1165,32 +1165,10 @@ rpmlog(RPMLOG_DEBUG, D_("sanity checking
if (!(rpmtsFilterFlags(ts) & RPMPROB_FILTER_REPLACEPKG)) {
ARGV_t keys = NULL;
int nkeys;
- xx = rpmdbMireApply(rpmtsGetRdb(ts), RPMTAG_NVRA,
- RPMMIRE_STRCMP, rpmteNEVRA(p), &keys);
+ xx = rpmdbMireApply(rpmtsGetRdb(ts), RPMTAG_HDRID,
+ RPMMIRE_STRCMP, rpmteHdrid(p), &keys);
nkeys = argvCount(keys);
-#if defined(RPM_VENDOR_MANDRIVA)
- /* mdvbz: #63711
- * workaround for distepoch never being added to RPMTAG_NVRA yet,
- * leading to packages of same EVRA but with different distepoch
- * being treated as the same package */
- if (nkeys > 0) {
- int i;
- for (i = 0; i < nkeys; i++) {
- rpmmi mi = rpmtsInitIterator(ts, RPMTAG_NVRA, keys[i], 0);
- Header h;
- while ((h = rpmmiNext(mi)) != NULL) {
- HE_t he = memset(alloca(sizeof(*he)), 0, sizeof(*he));
- he->tag = RPMTAG_DISTEPOCH;
- xx = headerGet(h, he, 0);
- if (strcmp(he->p.str ? he->p.str : "",
rpmteD(p) ? rpmteD(p) : ""))
- nkeys--;
- he->p.ptr = _free(he->p.ptr);
- }
- mi = rpmmiFree(mi);
- }
- }
-#endif
if (nkeys > 0)
rpmpsAppend(ps, RPMPROB_PKG_INSTALLED,
rpmteNEVR(p), rpmteKey(p),
______________________________________________________________________
RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org
Developer Communication List rpm-devel@rpm5.org
