Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 9th Jan 2008 22:24 UTC, submitted by darthtalon
General Development The newest version of the popular RPM package manager is now out with improved performance and functionality. But there's a bit of a catch with RPM version 5.0. Linux vendor Red Hat officially considers RPM 5.0 a project fork. "RPM5 is a fork of RPM, and is not related to RPM.org," Daniel Riek, Product Manager Red Hat Enterprise Linux told InternetNews.com. "Neither Red Hat or Fedora are involved in RPM5, and have no current plans to use it. Red Hat remains committed to the main RPM.org releases and development."
Thread beginning with comment 295148
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
What I don't like...
by kaiwai on Thu 10th Jan 2008 00:05 UTC
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

What I don't like is when I run Fedora there are constant issues; for example, the db which holds all the information constantly being locked by another process - there should be no need in this day and age of a 'one at a time please' approach to applications reading and writing to the package database. If it can't be done with the existing structure then they need to go back to the drawing board and address the deficiencies which stop it from being made possible.

The other issue, maybe this is more project related, is the fact I've tried to update packages, and package resolving is horrid. I've never experienced the same pain with Ubuntu/Debian as I do with Fedora 8. New updates come this morning, I click on apply updates, it then complains that there is a missing file - why isn't that being resolved automatically - it should reside in the repository!

That is I think the biggest problem, those who do use RPM do a cruddy job in its utilisation, and thus, when people have problems like when I do, they equate that to representing RPM when it is a distro specific issue.

Reply Score: 4

RE: What I don't like...
by Johann Chua on Thu 10th Jan 2008 01:35 in reply to "What I don't like..."
Johann Chua Member since:
2005-07-22

Problems with yum and RPM in Fedora helped pushed me towards Ubuntu. apt, dpkg, and .deb seem so much better for keeping the system up to date.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: What I don't like...
by raver31 on Thu 10th Jan 2008 11:29 in reply to "RE: What I don't like..."
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

Agreed...

And typing

update-manager -d -c

to upgrade between versions is totally amazing.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: What I don't like...
by gilboa on Thu 10th Jan 2008 01:58 in reply to "What I don't like..."
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

"What I don't like is when I run Fedora there are constant issues; for example, the db which holds all the information constantly being locked by another process - there should be no need in this day and age of a 'one at a time please' approach to applications reading and writing to the package database."

A. This problem is not RPM related - it's actually yum-related. (Yum is limited to one active instance - mostly due to problem C and friends).

B. AFAIR (correct me if I'm wrong) neither apt not dpkg doesn't support concurrent write operations either. (I can't test it right now; my Debian sid machine is down)

C. Concurrent writes (in both the package manager and the package manager front end) creates theoretical problems that cannot be easily solved. E.g. Yum1 installs application A that requires library B. B provides foo. Yum2 installs application C that requires library D. D provides foo. Obviously, B and D cannot be installed concurrently - but the package manager (again, RPM/dpkg, not apt/yum) doesn't know who provides what - before things get installed.
At best, (if the package manager update transactions remain atomic) one update will fail - after you finished downloading the application + dependencies for weird obscure reason. (D provides foo, B (installed) provides foo, cannot install)
On the other hand, if the package manager supports concurrent updates, (each install/update is a transaction by itself), you may end up with a broken installation.

D. The package manager itself is a fairly speedy beast. Installing 100 packages takes a minute or two. No use in risking DB breakage just to speed up such a short-lived task.

"The other issue, maybe this is more project related, is the fact I've tried to update packages, and package resolving is horrid. I've never experienced the same pain with Ubuntu/Debian as I do with Fedora 8. New updates come this morning, I click on apply updates, it then complains that there is a missing file - why isn't that being resolved automatically - it should reside in the repository!"

As you suggested - this is a repository problem.
More-ever, AFAIR apt simply drops broken update paths. Yum doesn't.
If you want yum to drop broken updates, simply install the yum-skip-broken plugin.
$ yum install yum-skip-broken
$ yum --skip-broken update

... I do agree that yum should ship with skip-broken and fastest mirrors (mirror auto-selection tool) by default.

- Gilboa

Edited 2008-01-10 02:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: What I don't like...
by superman on Thu 10th Jan 2008 04:31 in reply to "RE: What I don't like..."
superman Member since:
2006-08-01

> AFAIR apt simply drops broken update paths.

And this is really wrong.
If you have a security update, it should be applied. If the paquage manager can't apply the update, they should tell what the problem is (and trust me, yum do the right job in 99,999 % of time). The user can then take a decision (retry later, evaluate the issue, get help, bugzilla, etc). This is what does Yum, and Yum is right. Apt can silently ignore a security update for month.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: What I don't like...
by superman on Thu 10th Jan 2008 04:37 in reply to "RE: What I don't like..."
superman Member since:
2006-08-01

> I do agree that yum should ship with skip-broken

No.

> mirror auto-selection tool

$ yum info yum-fastestmirror
Name : yum-fastestmirror
[...]
Description:
This plugin sorts each repository's mirrorlist by connection speed
prior to downloading packages.


Just "yum install yum-fatestmirror".
I never use it.

Or check /etc/yum/yum-updatesd.conf :
# automatically install updates
do_update = no
# automatically download updates
do_download = no
# automatically download deps of updates
do_download_deps = no

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: What I don't like...
by superman on Thu 10th Jan 2008 04:27 in reply to "What I don't like..."
superman Member since:
2006-08-01

> the db which holds all the information constantly being locked by another process

It's a very very very old story.

> is the fact I've tried to update packages, and package resolving is horrid.

Bullshit ?

Why should rpm have resolving issue ?
Give some technical fact, please.

> it then complains that there is a missing file

If a file is missing on a mirror, the file is missing. Period.
What can rpm (or yum) handle this ?
Silently ignore the problem ?
Some package manager do this. I think they are really wrong.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: What I don't like...
by kaiwai on Thu 10th Jan 2008 04:40 in reply to "RE: What I don't like..."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I haven't changed a thing on my Fedora setup, I have left it to the status quo. Fedora setup the the mirrors, which IIRC is a php script which redirects me to an authorised mirror. How is it my fault, as an end user that the authorised mirrors aren't doing their job properly.

In regards to the issue. It is a missing dependency; there is an update for Rhythmbox, which has a dependency on libgpod which is being updated as there is new support for iPod Classic etc. etc. It complains about the lack of libsgutils.so.1 which isn't provided; so all it does is throw up a complaint - something which is on the shoulders of Fedora.

BUT! like I said, this has more to do with the shoddy work by Fedora/Red Hat than possibly anything to do with RPM per-say.

Edited 2008-01-10 04:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: What I don't like...
by VenomousGecko on Thu 10th Jan 2008 15:41 in reply to "What I don't like..."
VenomousGecko Member since:
2005-07-06

I agree that Fedora does have that problem sometimes, but I have had a similar experience running Kubuntu. More than once I have tried to download updates when notified only for apt to tell me that a package is broken or will not be installed because it WILL break another package. My opinion is not that is it the package manager's fault so much as it is the package maintainers.

Reply Parent Score: 1