Re: Multiple file ownership allowed nowadays?

[Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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 a
> >
> > I 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