Bug 11442 - rpm-3.0.4-0.48 breaks purp-0.9.2-2 (Powertools-6.2)
Summary: rpm-3.0.4-0.48 breaks purp-0.9.2-2 (Powertools-6.2)
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 11124
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: rpm
Version: 6.2
Hardware: i386
OS: Linux
medium
high
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jeff Johnson
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2000-05-16 11:54 UTC by Jean Berthomieu
Modified: 2008-05-01 15:37 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2000-05-20 10:06:10 UTC
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jean Berthomieu 2000-05-16 11:54:33 UTC
version 3.0.4 of rpm prevents "purp" from running on i386, sparc, ...
when purp is launched with an arg (path to RPMS), it dies with some message
stating that it could not load some shared library (module fdOpen).
After incriminating erroneously glibc, I could find it has to do with rpm.
Here is some dirty hack, until it is fixed :
Reinstalling old rpm from 6.1 dist.
- rpm -e rpm-build-3.0.4              # because of dependencies
- rpm -Uvh --force rpm-3.0.3-*.rpm    # from redhat-6.1
- rpm -Uvh --force rpm-python-3.0.4-*.rpm # that was overwriten by prev cmd

(don't know if I can reinstall rpm-build - which I don't need)

"purp" is the only tool I know that can upgrade a remote station thru a
text interface.

Comment 1 Chris Siebenmann 2000-05-20 10:06:59 UTC
RedHat has opted to change the RPM shared library ABI between
RPM 3.0.3 and RPM 3.0.4 without bothering to even increment the
shared library version number, so that there can be a visible
indication or warning of coming failures.

 Unfortunately, since they changed the API at the same time it's
not just a simple matter of recompiling the application.

 While RedHat is free to do this, I think it's a bit suboptimal
(among other things, it breaks RPM's dependancy checking!).
It should be possible to act like glibc and provide backwards
compatable interfaces (or even symbol versioning, perhaps).
Or simply avoid breaking the ABI and API in a minor version
change in a minor OS revision.

Comment 2 Jean Berthomieu 2000-07-04 13:39:22 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 11124 ***

Comment 3 Jean Berthomieu 2000-07-04 13:48:48 UTC
If you reinstalled previous version of rpm (3.0.3), so that purp keeps running,
don't forget to reinstall now, current version (i.e. rpm-3.0.4) before running
new purp-0.9.5 ;-)

(ftp://ftp.lysator.liu.se/pub/unix/purp/purp-0.9.5/purp-0.9.5-1.i386.rpm)


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.