Re: rpm: can it comply debian policy?
On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 11:57:39PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> > If rpm doesn't preserve ownerships at all, then I think that is a
> > design flaw (principle of least astonishment).
>
> When did anyone say that rpm did not preserve ownership data?
I'm trying to find out what rpm's behaviour is. Note the "if".
> > If it [rpm] does preserve ownerships in the general case and just
> > converts ownerships it doesn't know about to "root",
>
> It is true that rpm does that. But why are we talking about it and
> how does that apply to the discussion of alien not preserving rpm
> ownership?
Can we get away from alien for a moment, please? I've already said I'm
not disagreeing with there being a bug in alien; I was interested in
what rpm does in a particular edge case.
> > (what happens if you happen to have a user whose username coincides
> > with the person who built the package? Do all the files end up owned
> > by that user?).
>
> Huh? Of course not! I think you are fishing for trouble here. I am
> really trying not to have this discussion turn into a bashing of
> either rpms or debs. Please don't start up a baseless bashing session.
I am not trying to bash RPM.
I am not trying to bash RPM.
I am not trying to bash RPM.
I am trying to get some *technical information* out of curiosity;
formerly, the only way I could think of for this to work was completely
bizarre and damaged ownership data, hence my last mail. You've supplied
the information below though; I now realize that what you're trying to
say is that permissions metadata is stored outside the cpio filesystem
archive. OK, fine, I withdraw my earlier objection.
> > That's not to say that alien shouldn't try to duplicate the can of
> > worms where possible, but the packages you're describing aren't ones
> > to which I'd ever want to put my name.
>
> Just because they are .rpms does not make them evil.
*sigh* Just because I'm a Debian person doesn't mean I'm inherently
opposed to .rpms, you know. :)
> Just recently a Synopsys package needed shared libs from libncurses4
> which Debian does not support. I could not find a debian version
> anywhere. Perhaps one exists but I could not find one.
It won't be in woody, but you can still get it from potato. When woody
becomes stable, potato's packages will be available from
archive.debian.org, like other old releases.
Thanks for the clarification,
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: