rpm 5.x in Th

[Łukasz Chrustek]

Witam,


> On Sep 22, 2012, at 12:59 PM, Łukasz Chrustek <lukasz at chrustek.net> wrote:

>> 
>> I have problem with rollback option in latest rpm:
>> 
>> # export LANG=en_EN.UTF-8;rpm -Uvh --rollback '20 minutes ago'
>> Rollback goal:  Sat Sep 22 18:35:29 2012 (0x505de8d1)
>> BDB2053 Freeing read locks for locker 0xf1: 13697/3061184384
>> BDB2053 Freeing read locks for locker 0xf2: 13697/3061184384
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> BDB2017 Freeing mutex for process: 13697/0
>> rpm: rpmdb.c:2742: rpmmiInit: Assertion `keylen == sizeof(he->p.ui32p[0])' failed.
>> zsh: abort      rpm -Uvh --rollback '20 minutes ago'
>> 

> Are you actually using --rollback? If so, you are the
> only person on the planet using --rollback.

Well,  so  remove this option from rpm if it isn't usable. What for is
it  now  ?  I  think  it is/was nice, fast and proper way to return to
working  set  of  last updated set of packagaes. For what is repackage
(from where I took the old version in this case) ?

> There are no plans to support the previous --rollback
> mechanism @rpm5.org: WYSIWYG (and the entire mechanism
> is too cumbersome to use, you can find my analysis
> on some Mancoosi WP3 mailing list a couple years ago
> if so inclined).

OK.  Do  You  have/see  some  other  way  to  manage  transactions and
repackeged rpms ?

> Much better is/was possible/planned in rpm-5.3.x. Sadly
> the Mancoosi project decided to "fix" apt instead of rpm
> and --rollback efforts with TPPM in RPM were never finished.

And there is no plans for finish them ?

> These days BTRFS! BTRFS! BTRFS! snapshot management
> (which isn't --rollback transactional package management) is likely
> what most users want/need/expect. Inserting the necessary
> BTRFS ioctls is a very simple implementation waiting
> for BTRFS to become usefully/stably deployed in linux.

OK.  I  don't know what to say here. I don't know why rollback need to
be  connected  with  any  file  system,  for  me  it  is  some kind of
overreacting :P.

-- 
Regards,
 brushek