Proposal - don't install .rpmnew unless changed

Neal Becker ndbecker2 at
Thu Jan 19 15:25:53 UTC 2006

Paul Howarth wrote:

> Neal Becker wrote:
>> Paul Howarth wrote:
>>>Neal Becker wrote:
>>>>Paul Howarth wrote:
>>>>>Neal Becker wrote:
>>>>>>It would save admins a lot of time if we modify rpm so that it does
>>>>>>create a .rpmnew file if there is no change from the old file.  I
>>>>>>would think this would be a simple modification.
>>>>>It already does this, doesn't it?
>>>>I don't think so!  I keep syncing with develop every day, and most days
>>>>I get a bunch of messages about "blah created as .rpmnew", and every day
>>>>I run diff, and almost always get no output.
>>>Are you on an x86_64 box with lots of parallel-installed i386 packages?
>> Yes, x86_64.  I have most parallel i386 packages that are standard on
>> x86_64.  I did not install extra i386 packages.
>> Today, for example, there were a bunch of messages about upgrade to
>> kdelibs-3.5.0-5.  It does happen that there are both x86_64 and i386
>> versions of this, do you think this is the explanation?  In any case, any
>> chance to fix it?
> I think it's the same issue (multiple packages owning the same config
> file) as for /etc/vimrc, except in this case it's different-arch
> packages instead of different-name packages.
> I don't know what the *right* policy for these cases should be really.

Isn't it "right" to not create .rpmnew and report it to the user if there is
no diff to the current version?

More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list