Marcus Rueckert wrote:
On 2008-01-08 13:55:04 -0800, Dan Stromberg wrote:
We have about 1.5 dozen files (EG inittab) that are owned by openSUSE
and SLES, and also owned by an RPM that holds our product.
I gather this is generally considered poor practice - just how bad is it?
If we install the OS, install our product, then remove our product, are
we in for losing those OS files? Will the changes be reverted (I'm
guessing they won't be reverted)?
What if we never uninstall it? It would seem to violate the principle
of least surprise to have an RPM you should "just never uninstall", but
is there more to it than that?
What if we do an upgrade of our product RPM's - could trouble ensue
there with two RPM's owning a file?
I might prefer to move the tweaks to these system files into a shell
script (outside an RPM) as part of our OS installer (via autoyast), but
it's not entirely up to me.
What if we had our RPM's make algorithmic changes to files like inittab
instead of trying to own the files, and then have those same RPM's
attempt to algorithmically revert the changes on rpm deletion - would
that leave us in the same situation as having two RPM's owning a given
file? I'm guessing not, but I'd like to make sure we cover all the bases.
Oh, and are "application installation scripts" going the way of the dodo
now that rpm's and deb's and pkg's are taking off?
why do you need such overlaps at all?
darix
We may not not need dual file ownerships. In fact, I believe we don't.
We want to automate our install as much as possible, and some here
believe that rpm is the right way to automate it, including rpm file
dual ownership.
For example, we want to throw a getty on ttyS0 - for that we need to
change /etc/inittab. The approach so far has been to replace
/etc/inittab. I'm now trying to gently pitch changing it from a post
and postun.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
