Bisecting points the regression to commit
21836bc7524f8fc07972e0e56eed1c3b68775368
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2837#issuecomment-110637
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message
I used two packages from our CI -
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/ci-dnf-stack/tree/main/dnf-behave-tests/fixtures/specs/security-upgrade-multilib
```
Name: B
Epoch: 0
Version:1
Release:1
License:Public Domain
URL:None
Summary:
Rpm erasing the older versions is more or less expected (see below), but that
the equal version too seems bizarre and buggy alright. Can you provide the
reproducer for B, as simple as it may be?
For the erasure of older versions, the behavior depends on the package colors,
not architecture,
@pmatilai converted this issue into discussion #2841.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2840#event-11466189810
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
Easily reproduced with that. This is not just a bug but a regression too, 4.14
doesn't behave this way.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2837#issuecomment-1888743606
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to
AFAIR if the packages contain no files, they wont get any color.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2837#issuecomment-1889371001
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
Recently, rpm got the ability to make binary install packages for
micro-architectures levels -v2, -v3, -v4
Issue https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2463
PR https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2315
So, now its possible for a package developer/distributor has
Do we really want to do something special for "same NEVR"? I find that a bit
weird.
(But all that color handling is also super weird to me, and dnf/zypper also
does not know the package colors when calculating the transaction and has to
hope that the architecture matches the color.)
(BTW, is
Thanks for replying.
I have this code:
```
...
} else if (strcmp(token, "nodb") == 0){
pConf->rpmTransFlags |= RPMTRANS_FLAG_NODB;
} else if (strcmp(token, "noconfigs") == 0){
pConf->rpmTransFlags |=
