Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Package upgrades break if hardlinks got added (#1278)

2020-06-23 Thread Fabian Vogt
Thanks for the quick fix! -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1278#issuecomment-648050421___ Rpm-maint mailing

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Package upgrades break if hardlinks got added (#1278)

2020-06-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Thanks for reporting and the nice reproducer! -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1278#issuecomment-648046616___

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Package upgrades break if hardlinks got added (#1278)

2020-06-23 Thread Panu Matilainen
Closed #1278 via #1279. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1278#event-3472164919___ Rpm-maint mailing list

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Package upgrades break if hardlinks got added (#1278)

2020-06-22 Thread Panu Matilainen
Ah... makes sense. Thanks for spotting that! -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1278#issuecomment-647465328___

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Package upgrades break if hardlinks got added (#1278)

2020-06-22 Thread Fabian Vogt
Just found out that this only happens with `%_minimize_writes` enabled, as otherwise even unchanged files are recreated correctly as hardlinks. ``` D: create 100644 2 ( 0, 0) 0 /usr/file1;5ef086f0 D: touch 100644 2 ( 0, 0) 8 /usr/file2 ``` vs. ``` D: create 100644

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Package upgrades break if hardlinks got added (#1278)

2020-06-22 Thread Panu Matilainen
Ok, thanks for verifying. Just FWIW, --oldpackage is the "appropriate" flag for downgrades, --force is the BFH usually best left in the toolshed :grin: -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Package upgrades break if hardlinks got added (#1278)

2020-06-22 Thread Fabian Vogt
I ran the commands again without `--force` and edited the post accordingly. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Package upgrades break if hardlinks got added (#1278)

2020-06-22 Thread Fabian Vogt
Yes. I only used `--force` so that I can use the same commands for install, upgrade and downgrade. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Package upgrades break if hardlinks got added (#1278)

2020-06-22 Thread Panu Matilainen
With --force, if something breaks you get to keep the pieces. Is it reproducable without --force? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Package upgrades break if hardlinks got added (#1278)

2020-06-19 Thread Fabian Vogt
The algorithm used for installing hardlinks does not handle the case where a package upgrade includes additional names for an inode. It iterates the list of files from the beginning until the end and only writes content and metadata for the last occurence of an inode. For upgrades, there is no