[PLUG] RPM controlled? (Re: Removing previous kernels)

[Mark Martin]

With RPM, using your words, Karl, a unique prefix is allowed to represent the 
full package name, as it was with commands in VMS.  However, packages names 
have distinct parts, one of which is the version number.

RPM refuses to install packages that conflict with other packages unless 
explicitly instructed to ignore the conflicts.  Newer versions of the same 
package will replace the old package if installed with the "-U" flag or a 
package that conflicts with a completely different package can be forcibly 
installed using the "--force" directive.  Have I answered your question or 
just danced around it?

On Saturday 07 December 2002 14:34, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> If that is not the case, that the kernel package's name is different
> from that of other kernel packages, then I think it's a broken design.
> If that "longer name" to rpm you tell of means adding the package
> version number to the package name, then it's a broken design.  If what
> it does is allow a unique prefix to mean a fully written package name,
> then "alright", that's ok... the kernel packages must have that upstream
> version information encoded in them like I say above.
>
> With "dpkg", if two separate packages contain non disjoint file sets, or
> subsets of their file sets are not disjoint, the newer package is
> required to "Conflict" with the older one, and may optionally "Replace"
> it.  Does RPM have this?