Um, yeah

This RPM bug log makes for interesting reading. I particularly liked:

What everyone seems to be missing here, and that Jeff is getting very sick of repeating, is that RPM uses a "best effort" algorithm when doing upgrades. The RPM database was not corrupted; believe me, I can show you what a corrupted RPM database looks like.

What actually happened here is that the previous versions were removed as part of the upgrade process, and the newer versions were installed. At least as much as possible. :-) As many files as could be removed from the old install were, and that install was removed from the RPM DB. As much of the new stuff as could be installed was, but the install of some items failed, so the new packages were not added to the RPM DB. While this may not be what *you* think should've happened, it is consistent with RPM's upgrade algorithm and does NOT result in a corrupted database in any way, shape, or form.

Also:

Concerning the "best effort" policy of rpm, this has been this way since its creation AFAIK. In some environments its not acceptable, in others it is the sanest policy to use.

Gee, silly me. I would have thought that when the package manager couldn't put the system into a desired state, it would stop, restore the previous state, and ensure that at all times the package database reflects the content of the file system. Some of us consider the presence of files on disk that are not reflected in the package database to be a bug and serious error condition that should never occur.

But, well, I think this puts it the best:

Clearly you want a package manager which exceeds what RPM was/is designed and intended to do. You should either find one or write one yourself.

Yup. It's called dpkg. Which has always behaved in the manner that you think isn't viable in many environments.

Every time I wonder if Red Hat isn't starting to get up to Debian's quality, I find something like this and wonder why people keep running a distribution that takes this sort of slapdash, amateurish approach to critical system services.

I originally switched to Debian from Red Hat 7 because of the horror stories that I heard about upgrades and the prevelance of RPM database corruption. Some bugs may have been fixed, but I see the fundamental attitude hasn't changed.

Posted: 2006-06-08 20:41 — Why no comments?

Last spun 2013-07-01 from thread modified 2013-01-04