[opensuse-packaging] rpm-3.x - locking rpmdb
Hello, within rpm installation of package x i try in %pre to find out with rpm -q if package y is already installed. Seems that in rpm-3.x rpmdb is locked from the start, same script works with rpm-4.x its not a dependency/conflict etc., all i want is to echo some information if package y is also installed. Do i have some alternatives? Thanks, Andre -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
Hi, on 07/16/2009 12:45 PM Andre Hübner wrote:
all i want is to echo some information if package y is also installed. Do i have some alternatives?
Just don't do it. Calling rpm in trigger scripts and echo in trigger scripts are both things with various pitfalls. You should avoid them. YaST has a mechanism to show information before and after package installation. If you really really want to annoy your users with that information everytime the package gets installed you can use that. Maybe its sufficient to put it into a README.SUSE in the default doc dir? Henne -- Henne Vogelsang, openSUSE. Everybody has a plan, until they get hit. - Mike Tyson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On 16/07/09 06:45, Andre Hübner wrote:
Hello,
within rpm installation of package x i try in %pre to find out with rpm -q if package y is already installed. Seems that in rpm-3.x rpmdb is locked from the start, same script works with rpm-4.x its not a dependency/conflict etc., all i want is to echo some information if package y is also installed. Do i have some alternatives?
Dont do that then ;-) seriously ... explain what the real usecase is.. so we can give you some ideas.. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
;)
Dont do that then ;-) seriously ... explain what the real usecase is.. so we can give you some ideas..
in former realease of packaging to much and ominous scripts were used. some historical internal requirements... i want to avoid that package is installed as update. best way would be to enforce that old release is uninstalled before current package gets installed. Thanks, Andre -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On 7/16/2009 at 15:04, Andre Hübner<andre.huebner@gmx.de> wrote:
;)
Dont do that then ;-) seriously ... explain what the real usecase is.. so we can give you some ideas..
in former realease of packaging to much and ominous scripts were used. some
historical internal requirements... i want to avoid that package is installed as update. best way would be to enforce that old release is uninstalled before current package gets installed.
That sounds like a Conflicts: $oldpkg This will stop RPM from installing new package while old package is installed. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
Am Donnerstag, 16. Juli 2009 15:11:26 schrieb Dominique Leuenberger:
On 7/16/2009 at 15:04, Andre Hübner<andre.huebner@gmx.de> wrote:
;)
Dont do that then ;-) seriously ... explain what the real usecase is.. so we can give you some ideas..
in former realease of packaging to much and ominous scripts were used. some
historical internal requirements... i want to avoid that package is installed as update. best way would be to enforce that old release is uninstalled before current package gets installed.
That sounds like a Conflicts: $oldpkg
Alternative is to use: Provides: $oldpackage Obsoletes: $oldpackage than the old package will get deinstalled and the new one gets installed. Downside is that the old package can not be installed in parallel. bye adrian
This will stop RPM from installing new package while old package is installed.
-- Adrian Schroeter SUSE Linux Products GmbH email: adrian@suse.de -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
That sounds like a Conflicts: $oldpkg
I tried but i think i cant use it. Its in my case not a conflict with other package which could be named as conflict. In my deplorable case the package ""conflicts"" with former release. name/version is still the same, just release is changed. adding a conflict to$pkg < %{version}-%{release} does not work/gets ignored. all i want ist that package is not used as update, all former releases should be uninstalled before installing this release, because i expect some trouble by these old %preun scriplets ;( Thanks, Andre -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
Andre Hübner wrote:
That sounds like a Conflicts: $oldpkg
I tried but i think i cant use it. Its in my case not a conflict with other package which could be named as conflict. In my deplorable case the package ""conflicts"" with former release. name/version is still the same, just release is changed. adding a conflict to$pkg < %{version}-%{release} does not work/gets ignored. all i want ist that package is not used as update, all former releases should be uninstalled before installing this release, because i expect some trouble by these old %preun scriplets ;(
Use provides and obsoletes like Adrian suggested.
Thanks, Andre
-- Best Regards / S pozdravom, Pavol RUSNAK SUSE LINUX, s.r.o openSUSE Community Multiplier Team Lihovarska 1060/12 PGP 0xA6917144 19000 Praha 9, CR prusnak[at]suse.cz http://www.suse.cz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On 7/16/2009 at 17:06, Pavol Rusnak <prusnak@suse.cz> wrote: Use provides and obsoletes like Adrian suggested.
But this will still pose a problem. As I understand, the issue is: Old package: foo-1.0 New package: foo-1.1 Andre needs a way to be sure that rpm -Uhv foo-1.1 does not work, as he does not trust the scripts from foo-1.0 The provides / obsolete won't help him (as it's implicit in this situation anyhow). Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
Andre needs a way to be sure that rpm -Uhv foo-1.1 does not work, as he does not trust the scripts from foo-1.0
The provides / obsolete won't help him (as it's implicit in this situation anyhow).
yes, thats it. tomorrow i will try with testing existence of file and do an exit if file exists. This will force the user to uninstall foo-1.0 and install foo-1.1 after that explicit uninstall. testing existence of file seems to be most acceptable at the moment... Thanks, Andre -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 05:32:44PM +0200, Andre Hübner wrote:
yes, thats it. tomorrow i will try with testing existence of file and do an exit if file exists.
Uh, please *never* do an exit 1 in a pre/postinstall scriptlet. It'll abort in the middle of the transaction and the user will have an inconsistent system state. Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF Markus Rex, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);} -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
Uh, please *never* do an exit 1 in a pre/postinstall scriptlet. It'll abort in the middle of the transaction and the user will have an inconsistent system state.
And the clean way to avoid installation are only explicit conflcts/obsoletes entries in spec? Other chances to do this if only in scripts some annoying conditions could be checked? Thanks, Andre -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 08:18:48PM +0200, Andre Hübner wrote:
Uh, please *never* do an exit 1 in a pre/postinstall scriptlet. It'll abort in the middle of the transaction and the user will have an inconsistent system state.
And the clean way to avoid installation are only explicit conflcts/obsoletes entries in spec?
Yes, that's true.
Other chances to do this if only in scripts some annoying conditions could be checked?
No, when scripts are run the transaction is already in progess... Sorry, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF Markus Rex, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);} -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
Le jeudi 16 juillet 2009, à 17:44 +0200, Michael Schroeder a écrit :
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 05:32:44PM +0200, Andre Hübner wrote:
yes, thats it. tomorrow i will try with testing existence of file and do an exit if file exists.
Uh, please *never* do an exit 1 in a pre/postinstall scriptlet. It'll abort in the middle of the transaction and the user will have an inconsistent system state.
Hrm, if it's so easy to break the system, shouldn't rpm do something to avoid this? Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 10:57:24AM +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le jeudi 16 juillet 2009, à 17:44 +0200, Michael Schroeder a écrit :
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 05:32:44PM +0200, Andre Hübner wrote:
yes, thats it. tomorrow i will try with testing existence of file and do an exit if file exists.
Uh, please *never* do an exit 1 in a pre/postinstall scriptlet. It'll abort in the middle of the transaction and the user will have an inconsistent system state.
Hrm, if it's so easy to break the system, shouldn't rpm do something to avoid this?
Good question, that's one of the reasons why we call rpm for every transaction step in libzypp. If the step fails (scriptlet failure or something else) we can ask the user to retry/skip/abort. If it's just one transaction (e.g. you called rpm yourself with many rpms as arguments) and something fails you're pretty much lost (the more so as rpm deletes all old packages at the end of the transaction, thus you'll have lots of duplicate packages in your system). Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF Markus Rex, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);} -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On 16/07/09 11:32, Andre Hübner wrote:
yes, thats it. tomorrow i will try with testing existence of file and do an exit if file exists.
No! you never _ever_ do that.
This will force the user to uninstall foo-1.0 and install foo-1.1 after that explicit uninstall. testing existence of file seems to be most acceptable at the moment...
what kind of file are you testing before exit ? is it a configuration file ? a binary ? this smells pretty fishy to me.. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On 16/07/09 09:04, Andre Hübner wrote:
in former realease of packaging to much and ominous scripts were used. some historical internal requirements...
If the new package does not have this scripts..what is the exact problem then ? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
within rpm installation of package x i try in %pre to find out with rpm -q if package y is already installed. Seems that in rpm-3.x rpmdb is locked from the start, same script works with rpm-4.x its not a dependency/conflict etc., all i want is to echo some information if package y is also installed. Do i have some alternatives?
Dont do that then ;-) seriously ... explain what the real usecase is.. so we can give you some ideas..
i think i found a solution. reason for my problem is that during upgrade the %postun of old package runs after %post of new package. this removes some changes made by %post of new package. uninstall --> install is working because order of scriptlets is like expected. is the %posttrans section useable to make sure that last action is triggered by new package? %posttrans is new to me, i found it in a fedora-wiki... otherwise i have to fix the few affected machines by hand and in new rpm i can consider special situation like described here: http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/Guidelines#Running_scriptlets_only_in_certa... this should fix my problem also at further packageupgrades. i know that to much scripting in rpms should be avoided, but its just for internal puposes and sometimes special situations require special solutions... Thanks, Andre -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 10:26:24AM +0200, Andre Hübner wrote:
i think i found a solution. reason for my problem is that during upgrade the %postun of old package runs after %post of new package. this removes some changes made by %post of new package. uninstall --> install is working because order of scriptlets is like expected. is the %posttrans section useable to make sure that last action is triggered by new package? %posttrans is new to me, i found it in a fedora-wiki...
Well, posttrans is run at the end of the transaction, so if some other package fails and the transaction is aborted it'll never be run. Our gnome folks use it for the same purpose. I don't really like this solution for the reason stated above, plus it'll also break prereq semantics. I.e. if a package prereqs your package, it won't work as the posttrans script isn't run before the other package gets installed. But it's currently the only sane way to achieve this (one other method is a uninstall trigger on the old package). I hope this will be fixed in the future by some other scriplet type ("update scripts"). My idea is that if an update script is present the uninstall scripts are not called, thus you do no longer have to work around broken uninstall scripts. Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF Markus Rex, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);} -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
Well, posttrans is run at the end of the transaction, so if some other package fails and the transaction is aborted it'll never be run. Our gnome folks use it for the same purpose.
seems that %posttrans is not known to rpm 3.x, in 4.x it works. would be to easy... but reduces problematic machines to ~5, i can fix them by hand and next rpm which coniders install/upgrade situation on %postun should fix the whole thing. Thanks, Andre -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 12:45:51PM +0200, Andre Hübner wrote:
within rpm installation of package x i try in %pre to find out with rpm -q if package y is already installed. Seems that in rpm-3.x rpmdb is locked from the start, same script works with rpm-4.x its not a dependency/conflict etc., all i want is to echo some information if package y is also installed. Do i have some alternatives?
Check the existance of a file that you know is in package y. Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF Markus Rex, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);} -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
participants (8)
-
Adrian Schröter -
Andre Hübner -
Cristian Rodríguez -
Dominique Leuenberger -
Henne Vogelsang -
Michael Schroeder -
Pavol Rusnak -
Vincent Untz