Bug 10776
Summary: | [RFE] make RPM deal with .[arch].rpm in packagename | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Linux | Reporter: | Matthew Miller <mattdm> |
Component: | rpm | Assignee: | Jeff Johnson <jbj> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 6.2 | Keywords: | FutureFeature |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Enhancement | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2000-09-14 18:02:16 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Matthew Miller
2000-04-13 03:41:18 UTC
I highly suspect that this comment on slashdot http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=uselinuxcuz&cid=56 for example is symptomatic of the problem. "[...] (and RPM sucks!!) Installing software is easy, but removing it can be irritating." Another example: http://x38.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=603388343&CONTEXT=956003588.994246661&hitnum=21 I'm not suggesting that software should be engineered to appease the sucks/rules crowd, but it seems like a little technical change could do a lot to ease a widespread (and detrimental) myth. This problem will be addressed after rpm-4.0 is released. rpm must be able to deal with both packag and file names, as this is what rpm manages. If anything, the confusion is going to get worse in the future, as rpm-4.0.3 has file manifests (i.e. glob expressions contained in a file used to generate a package manifest), and rpm-4.1 is going to manage public keys used to sign packages by permitting detached mime-type signatures on the command line. In fact, I can already see the need to permit tarballs and other archive formats, as well as file names on the rpm command line, to be used to generate header meta-data on the fly. The only other alternative is to force myriad and sundry command line options to identify what the next argument, I'd rather just deal with /etc/magic, thank you. So, while I understand the confusion, I don't believe that there's any viable implementation to remove the confusion between package names and file names. And I believe the situation is going to get worse. |