On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 11:31:15AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > RPM is not designed for downgrades > > >One of the core features of rpm from the very beginning was to > >downgrades and uninstalls so the user is able to revert from a bad > >package. So rpm does indeed support downgrades by design. > > Except that there is no proper way to revert back changes that is done > through install scripts or triggers and what not. There is also the > thing that QA is never done on downgrades. Packages can be broken, of course, and any package installing itself in an inrevocable way in scriplets that isn't undone by %*un scripts is usually broken irrespective of downgrade or upgrades. You can also have broken packages breaking upgrade paths, and we have a large list of such existing examples. In short broken packages don't indicate any (missing) abilities in rpm itself. Otherwise for each feature of rpm we could find a broken package and we'd conclude that rpm is designed for nothing. ;) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpQkvDfkUBgH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
