Unneeded assertions (supposed to have been: RPM upgrade discussion)

[Michael Schwendt]

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 11:17:01 +0100, Ingo T. Storm wrote:

> >The "RPM stale locks" problem is a serious issue for the average
> >user despite the "rm -f /var/lib/rpm/__db.*" work-around
> >being available.
> 
> I don't think that many "average users" will use FedoraLegacy. They are
> probably on FC1, Suse, Gentoo, Debian, you-name-it by now. rh7x is legacy,
> isn't it?

I don't refer to RPM on rh7x, because I don't see any problems there.
That "RPM hangs" problem was introduced with rh80, which some people want
to cover with Legacy updates, too. I could or should have written
s/user/admin/, because that holds true even more. But users are also
affected by the upgrade rush at the end of a rh80/rh9 life cycle and many
have not installed their system when the OS was released, but months
later. Regardless of whether user or admin, it is beyond most people's
comprehension why such an annoying problem with RPM is not fixed. On rh80,
the RPM from the fedora.us "patches" repository works a lot more reliable.

-- 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legacy-list/attachments/20040103/54705ba9/attachment.sig>