rpm 5.x in Th

[Jeffrey Johnson]

On Sep 23, 2012, at 6:45 PM, Łukasz Chrustek <lukasz at chrustek.net> wrote:

> 
>> I am trying to warn -- politely -- that you are in uncharted
>> and unsupported waters if relying on --rollback as it used to
>> exist in RPM.
> 
> OK,  understand. Now it isn't working anyway (and I think, that should
> be  removed  -  but it is Your project), so I need to be more carefull
> (to not have the reason to use --rollbacke) and write some scripts now
> to make my own --rollback.
> 

Hint: if you asked -- nicely -- and gave me a reproducer
I could likely repair whatever (likely modest) damage exists
with --rollback. There's nothing in the rpm C implementation
that isn't in the perl 1-liner, just untested.

Or rip out --rollback in RPM if "false advertising"
is the problem. Deleting code is utterly simple patching.

> 
>> Hint: I release @rpm5.org (and run continuous integration
>> in buildbots) with repackaging enabled.
> 
>> Every distro I am aware of disables repackaging, and most
>> user comments I have read suggest disabling to save disk space.
> 
> I'm  using  repackege,  and  I  think  that  in PLD there is more such
> persons.  Now using repackege (FOR ME) will change, but I will use it,
> because I'm testing some new versions, and sometimes I don't have time
> to  finish  tests.  Then  I  ... yes - were using rollback to fast and
> easly  return  to  working  version,  next day/night I could return to
> testing  (this procedure were used by me _sometimes_ on production env
> - after testing number of upgraded packeges by poldek -u -t package)
> 

There are usage cases for repackaging no matter how/why --rollback
is implemented.

>> Sorry: I get gang-raped repeatedly by trolls. These
>> days I have zero tolerance:
>>        You want a flamefest? Fine by me …
> 
> I  don't  want/need  flamefest.  This  'piece'  of You take to another
> mailing list.
> 

I don't want a flamefest either. Howvere, I am entirely in
reactive mode: PLD chose when to upgrade to @rpm5.org, and
bugs appear outside of my control.

Hint: try launchpad.net/rpm bug reporting (and/or blueprints)
if you wish to avoid flamefests.

>> But yes this thread is a total waste of time trivially solved
>> by some minor thought and scripting.
> 
>> But --rollback in an RPM context is something other than a perl
>> 1-liner.
> 
> Yes.  I  can  see.  But,  please  do  not  involve  some  file  system
> transaction into it :)
> 

The issues involved in logging 10-20 system calls are
rather trivial compared to the issues of transactionally
protecting (possibly buggy!) scriptlet operations.

73 de Jeff

> -- 
> regards,
> Łukasz Chrustek
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pld-devel-en mailing list
> pld-devel-en at lists.pld-linux.org
> http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en