sendmail update left me in a fix

[Peter J. Holzer]

On 2006-04-10 11:53:04 +0100, Brian Morrison wrote:
> On 10/04/2006 Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > > That's when the config file has essential changes for the updated
> > > package to work at all, and hence must be installed. The rpmsave 
> > > file is there as a hint that you need to merge your previous changes with 
> > > the new format.
> > 
> > How does RPM decide whether the changes are "essential"? Is there a 
> > flag in the SPEC file?
> 
> It is decided by whoever writes the spec file.

Hmpf. I guess that's what I deserve for asking such imprecise questions.

Ok, I think I found it in /usr/share/doc/rpm-4.3.1/spec:

| The %config(noreplace) indicates that the file in the package should
| be installed with extension .rpmnew if there is already a modified file
| with the same name on the installed machine.

So, the default seems to be to replace config files, but it the packager
deems an update non-essential he can mark it with noreplace.

BTW, is there somewhere a complete up-to-date description of the spec
file? The file above is just a "what's new since some unspecified
release" file, and RPM to the max is now over 5 years old.

	hp

-- 
   _  | Peter J. Holzer    | If I wanted to be "academically correct",
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR       | I'd be programming in Java.
| |   | hjp at wsr.ac.at      | I don't, and I'm not.
__/   | http://www.hjp.at/ |   -- Jesse Erlbaum on dbi-users
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 388 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legacy-list/attachments/20060410/7fa9f8bd/attachment.sig>