From: Velu Erwan (erwan_at_seanodes.com)
Date: Wed 23 Feb 2005 - 11:21:42 GMT
> I have to admit that I do not know anything about 'urpmi', but with
> 'yum' and 'apt' I can configure the repository which is going to be
> used. This makes it possible to install FC2 guests on FC3 hosts by using
> '... -d fc2'.
In urpmi you can choose the repository you want to install.
> So it would be nice when I could call 'urpmi' in the same way (install
> mdk9 guests on a mdk10 hosts e.g.).
This is the case :)
> Oooh... I just detected an ugly bug in the rpmdb handling which was
> hidden by the /var/lib/rpm symlink.
> Please try [1] if it fixes your problems. Else:
I will.
[...]
> Using /.rpmdb is a hack; /dev would be a much nicer place because it
> is available everywhere and ignored by rpm. But there is rh bugzilla
> bug #106057 which requires that the rpm database must be both in the
> chroot-environment and in the real-root one. So the /.rpmdb has to
> stay.
SO it seems that many vserver are sharing the /.rpmdb of my real system.
So it sounds like all my vserver are sharing the same rpmdb which is not
interesting. Am I wrong ?
> The position of the rpm-database is specified by the %_dbpath macro
> which is changed in the vserver specific rpm-configuration. I do not
> know if 'urpmi' honors this macro (apt had a similar bug which caused me
> to create an (insecure) /var/lib/rpm -> /.rpmdb symlink), whether it
> must be configured at another place, or if 'urpmi' must be fixed.
Ok I'll check that.
-- Erwan Velu Consultant - Seanodes SA http://www.seanodes.com
_______________________________________________
Vserver mailing list
Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org
http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver