Re: dependency tool for RedHat

["Arnaud Abelard" <arnaud abelard sciences univ-nantes fr>]

> Which is a good thing.  If you insist on running with inconsistent rpm
> databases, then your system is hosed by definition.  In the case above,
> if the rpm you want to install insists on the lower library (I don't
> think I ever see many that do Requires: ... < (version)), then either
> it's a packaging bug (the software works fine with this newer version)
> or it's an actual situation where the newer lib doesn't work well (in
> which case using --nodeps won't make the software magically work).

That's true, but in some case the inconsistency is unavoidable.. a
compiled library, or a more recent library than the one required by a rpm
(require: libsomething1.2.1 for example)
apt-get could warn the user and prompt them: "this can cause harm to your
system, are you sure you want to continue [Y/N]" or maybe implements a
--force mode. Of course that could be dangerous in certain cases.. not all
the time.

>
>
> The only good argument for ever having an inconsistent database is those
> precious few instances where you have to change versions on some
> packages and between those versions the package set is done differently,
> so you need to be inconsistent to remove parts and upgrade parts at the
> same time.
>

> So, thank you apt-get for not working when being inconsistent.

Yes, sometimes it's important to refuse working with a inconsistent rpm
db, but could be usefull to...security is important.. but sometimes taking
risks is the only solution

I can't figure what's YUM's behavior in that case.. will it refuse to
install new rpms too?

>
> Thomas
>

Arnaud