rpm -Uhv --oldpackage loses configs

Tomasz Pala gotar at polanet.pl
Wed Jun 8 11:58:50 CEST 2016

On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 00:10:36 -0400, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:

>> http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2008-February/001911.html
> OK, I???ll bite: you quote James Antill from 8 years ago ??? what are you trying to say? Please ???
>> FS-level snapshots are shortest way to 'reboot to upgrade' insanity.
> So you seem to not like ???FS snapshots??? ??? Good, I think FS snapshots have little to
> do with ???rollback too, we may possibly agree. FS snapshots have a usage case,
> but not with ???rollback for package management.

I'm just trying to figure out what mechanisms are you suggesting instead
repackages - I'm using snapshots, but for other purposes, glad we agree!

> All I meant to suggest is that the PLD devel list is _NOT_ the pace to discuss RPM package management
> issues (including repackaging, and ???rollback) seriously.

OK, listen - I am really only interested in working alternatives if you know any.
Not digging into internals, glad we agree!

>>> This thread is/was diagnosing a problem and devising a solution, not otherwise.
>> Different approach to entire repackage (that YOU suggested) is also a solution.
> What are you trying to say here? Do you like/want repackaging or not? I did successfully implement
> repackaging (what is currently used by PLD) while @redhat in like 2003 or so.

Surely I do! In fact, if it were gone like in RH, I would be probably
not using PLD anymore, because it would be unusable for me.

> I???m happy you like what I implemented, but damfino what you wish changed.

"There are also better solutions than /var/spool/repackage that can be
attempted these days"

I wish to only know these better solutions you've mentioned. Nothing
more. Did you mean something in RPM internals? Or some other mechanism?
Tool? Or maybe you meant %config files in repackages are not so
important, because this particular issue should be solved via git?

> Um, a yum-history citation, and from 2010??? which depends on what is called a ???yumdb??? ???
> is mostly useless, perhaps more useless than FS snapshots that you seem to dislike.

So, once again, we agree!

> You???ll have to remind me of what I wrote, I have written lots about RPM over the years ???

Oh, it was just one year ago - almost exactly (yet referring to May 2003):
But this is about %config - now just seeking if anything new has appeared in
those years in regard for entire upgrade transaction, that would make my current workflow obsolete.

> Please don???t take my comments personally: I???ll be happy to discuss better RPM
> implementations as you wish in an appropriate forum related to RPM, not PLD.

I like the current implementation (repackages) and had an impression,
that you are proposing _some_ alternative. If, by saing "can be
attempted", you had in mind "new mechanism can be _developed_", than
yes, it's OT for pld-devel. It just wasn't clear for me, if you suggest
attempting to USE _some_ better solution, or attempting to DEVELOP one.

We seem to have reached a consensus on this matter.

Tomasz Pala <gotar at pld-linux.org>

More information about the pld-devel-en mailing list