FC5T3: Duplicate packages installed

[Mike A. Harris]

Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 15:36 -0600, Jonathan Berry wrote:
> 
>>Why is this not the default queryformat for x86_64?  It would cut down
>>on a lot of confusion and noise for those new to the x86_64 platform. 
>>And I do not see what it would hurt to make it default in all cases if
>>it complicates things to make it default for only x86_64.  It's fairly
>>simple to add this to your .rpmmacros, but the people who will know to
>>do this will already know about the dual-arch stuff. 
> 
> 
> Because changing the expected output of rpm -q is a bad bad thing.
> Don't do that.  Of course people shouldn't be screen scraping the output
> or relying on it w/out doing their own --qf for ensured stability,
> people do anyway, and we'd rather not break all their scripts.

For FC5 I agree with that of course, since we're nearing the end of the
FC5 devel cycle.  Once FC6 development begins however, it would be a
prime time to make this change to rpm in rawhide so that everyone who
relies on the current behaviour will have plenty of time to fix their
scripts.

Then, if it appears there are still a lot of broken scripts out there as
FC6 nears, we can change it back to the current query results for FC6,
and then re-change it for FC7 development.

The end goal being a migration from what it reports now, to what we
would like it to report in the future, with plenty of time for people
to fix broken scripts that don't formulate their own --qf queries.

This allows forward progress, while minimizing problems, and providing
a migration path.


-- 
Mike A. Harris  *  Open Source Advocate  *  http://mharris.ca
                       Proud Canadian.