[bt-devel] Naming for bibletime?

[Brook Humphrey]

On Monday 18 June 2001 09:08 am, you wrote:
> > I think the problem here is me I did not pay enough attention to the
> > naming
> > at first and so if anyone out there has installed any of the beta
> > versions of
> > the rpm's I made they will have a hard time upgrading with rpm.
> >
> > The solution would be to uninstall all beta versions first and then
> > install
> > 1.0. If we post something on the site saying this it should be ok. Like I
> > said it just has to do with the way that rpm handels upgrades.
>
> There must be a way to do this.
> SuSE sometimes has packages replacing other packages;
> somehow rpm does realize this and reinstalls the other
> packages when installing/upgrading to the new package.
> Maybe there are some flags for the spec we can use?
>
> BTW: how are package conflicts and dependencies handled
> by rpm? Are they written in the spec?

Yes you can add deprnds or requires for extra libs or programs that should be 
installed for proper running. like proftp needing tcpwrappers for secure use 
but the binary itself does not require tcpwrappers.

Another example is that bibletime provides sword in my current spec this is 
because sword is compiled in. This becomes important if the modules are 
installed as rpm's as they requre sword.

like I said this is not rpm's fault it is mine I was not paying attention 
when I named some of the first beta builds. Due to my mistake rpm will not 
like to do an upgrade it will probably say that the package is already 
installed. I have not verified this but from what I have read this will be 
likely.


>
> Martin

----------------------------------------
Content-Type: application/octet-stream; charset="us-ascii"; name="Attachment: 
1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: 
----------------------------------------