Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 461898
yum localinstall/rpm -i allows me to install package obsoleted by another package
Last modified: 2008-10-10 12:12:00 EDT
Description of problem:
`yum localinstall`/`rpm -i` allows me to install package obsoleted by installed package.
# rpm -q --obsoletes yum
# rpm -qp --provides yum-skip-broken-1.1.10-9.el5.noarch.rpm
config(yum-skip-broken) = 1.1.10-9.el5
yum-skip-broken = 1.1.10-9.el5
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. # yum localinstall yum-skip-broken-1.1.10-9.el5.noarch.rpm
1. # rpm -ivh yum-skip-broken-1.1.10-9.el5.noarch.rpm
Package installed without problems
yum/rpm should deny to install obsoleted package
1) Maybe this is expected for yum and bug for rpm (or vice versa), I do not know. If that is expected for both, sorry.
2) Would adding 'Conflicts:' to the yum help with this? This could be problem for custommers because new yum tracebacks with yum-skip-broken installed.
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has requested
further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed
products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update
The fact rpm also fails worries me that this is intentional in some way.
Adding a conflict should work around the problem, so I can do that to yum.
So the rpm should deny the installation as well, right?
what do you think here (comment #2)?
Dunno about intentional, other than "it's always been that way" (https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/rpm-maint/2007-June/000425.html). Apt-rpm does refuse to install obsoleted packages, that caused quite a bit of pain back in the days on Ximian Desktop which installed db1 which was obsoleted by db4 (or something like that)
Permitting installing of obsoleted packages certainly can cause unexpected situations:
1) User installs package A 1.0-1 which obsoletes B
2) User installs package B, no complaints
3) User updates to A 1.0-2, package B gets removed without notice. Unless something actually depends on it, in which case you can't cleanly update a system rpm was previously seemingly happy with.
In my opinion, if rpm allows the obsoleted packages to be installed yum should too.
So maybe we should create two RFE's (one each for rpm/yum) to change this behaviuor for RHEL6? For RHEL-5, I think we should just live with it.
I've created 466499, for the RHEL6 RFE. I don't think we should change this
mid RHEL5, so I'm closing this.