Dne 7.4.2016 v 11:17 Michael Mraka napsal(a):
> I'd like to hear your unbiased opinion that's why I don't include
> neither my preferences nor current rpm behavior for now.
>
> An example to think about - have a package with following requires installed
> richdep.spec:
> Requires: A
> Requires: B
> Requires: (C and D)
> Requires: (E or F)
> Requires: (G if H else I)
>
> Which of the following queries should include 'richdep' in the output?
> rpm -q --whatrequires A
> rpm -q --whatrequires B
>
> rpm -q --whatrequires C
> rpm -q --whatrequires D
> rpm -q --whatrequires '(C and D)'
>
> rpm -q --whatrequires E
> rpm -q --whatrequires F
> rpm -q --whatrequires '(E or F)'
> rpm -q --whatrequires G
> rpm -q --whatrequires '(G if H)'
> rpm -q --whatrequires '(G if H else I)'
The current implementation returns packages that *potentially* break
if the package is deinstalled. I.e. all of
rpm -q --whatrequires A
rpm -q --whatrequires B
rpm -q --whatrequires C
rpm -q --whatrequires D
rpm -q --whatrequires E
rpm -q --whatrequires F
rpm -q --whatrequires G
return "richdep". I think that's the correct behaviour, but I'm biased
as I implemented it ;)
(I think that "--whatrequires '(G if H else I)'" also gives you an answer,
but it does an exact string match.)
Cheers,
Michael.
--
Michael Schroeder m...@suse.de
SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}
_______________________________________________
Rpm-ecosystem mailing list
Rpm-ecosystem@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-ecosystem
