Re: Multiple file ownership allowed nowadays?
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
On 01/30/2012 02:31 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2012, 23:38 -0500 schrieb Jon Stanley:On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Christoph Wickert <christoph.wickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:I wonder if this rule is still needed. I know I'd loose backward compatibility with older rpm versions, but I don't want make aI agree that a -common subpackage is silly for this, but are any of the RPM versions that this *wouldn't* work with still in supported releases?Not in Fedora.The only one I'd be concerned with is RHEL5, but I think even that works right, no?I haven't tested it, but based on my experience with multi-arch file conflicts I *guess* it will not work on RHEL 5.
Sharing identical files between packages has always been allowed in rpm, that's not an issue.
The bugs in RHEL 5 (and older) have to do with conflicts NOT getting reported in some situations, notably on multilib systems when packages with conflicting files get installed in a single transaction the conflicts go ignored, but when installed in separate transactions conflicts are raised on the same files.
- Panu - -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
[Home] [Fedora Legacy] [Fedora Desktop] [Red Hat 9 Bible] [Fedora Bible] [Fedora SELinux] [Big List of Linux Books] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [KDE Users] [Fedora Tools]