"rpm -V" should report missing files once replacing package is erased
Bug #633691 reported by
Jeff Johnson
This bug affects 1 person
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
RPM |
Won't Fix
|
Wishlist
|
Unassigned | ||
Fedora |
Won't Fix
|
Medium
|
Bug Description
Tracker
Changed in rpm: | |
status: | New → Won't Fix |
importance: | Undecided → Wishlist |
tags: | added: fedora verify |
Changed in fedora: | |
importance: | Unknown → Medium |
status: | Unknown → Won't Fix |
To post a comment you must log in.
Description of problem:
I noticed that after installing i?86 and x86_64 versions of a package and then removing the x86_64 version, the executables were missing. That's understandable: rpm removed the x86_64 executables and had no way to magically bring back the i?86 ones. But I think "rpm -V" on the i?86 package should then report the missing executables, since they are likely to break the functionality of the package. More generally, a replaced file should be reported as missing if the package that replaced it is no longer present.
This looks related to bug 171279.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 1-1.fc11. x86_64
rpm-4.7.
How reproducible:
Always
Steps to Reproduce: release- 11-1.noarch package. /PATH/TO/ root install openssl.i686 openssl.x86_64 /PATH/TO/ root -e openssl.x86_64 root/usr/ bin/openssl /PATH/TO/ root -V openssl.i686
1. Set up a little chroot containing /etc/rpm/platform set to x86_64-redhat-linux and the fedora-
2. yum --installroot=
3. rpm --root=
4. ls -l /PATH/TO/
5. rpm --root=
Actual results:
Lots of ".......T." for the reason discussed in bug 171279, but nothing about /usr/bin/openssl .
Expected results:
missing /usr/bin/openssl