Re: Setting 'installonlypkgs' from the repository?

On 6/19/07, Brian Long <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 17:09 +0200, Tarjei Knapstad wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to figure out if it's possible to force packages to be
> > "installonly" from the repository or if I have to make sure that every
> > user has a correct "installonlypkgs=" directive in their .repo file.
> >
> > I found a python script in the archives for listing which packages are
> > installonly, and on my Fedora 7 system this defaults to the kernel
> > packages. Yet, the kmod-nvidia package from Livna for instance seems
> > to be installonly as well (I've got two of these installed matching my
> > kernels), and there is no installonlypkg directive in the livna.repo
> > file. I also couldn't find anything in the livna repodata dictating
> > that the kmod-nvidia package should be installonly.
> >
> > How does this work? Does the kmod-nvidia package become installonly
> > because it requires another package that is installonly (the kernel)?
>
> Tarjei,
>
> If you look closely at the name of the kmod-nvidia package, that's not
> the full name.  The full name on each one is distinct and it matches the
> kernel version to which it is tied.
>
> It is not being set to installonly from the repo and to my knowledge,
> there is not a way to do this.
>

Hi Brian,

Hmm, I don't see what you mean... (maybe I'm being dense)

If I do a rpm -qi kmod-nvidia I get two entries:

Name        : kmod-nvidia                  Relocations: (not relocatable)
Version     : 100.14.09                         Vendor: rpm.livna.org
Release     : 1.2.6.21_1.3194.fc7           Build Date: Sun 10 Jun 2007 06:06:32

Name        : kmod-nvidia                  Relocations: (not relocatable)
Version     : 100.14.09                         Vendor: rpm.livna.org
Release     : 1.2.6.21_1.3228.fc7           Build Date: Thu 14 Jun 2007 01:03:19

Same name, same version, different releases, the second one installed
instead of updated after a 'yum update'...

Thanks for the info about the repo part, guess I'll just have to add a
 'my-release.noarch' rpm containing the .repo files to keep things the
way they should be (hopefully).

Cheers,
--
Tarjei