Jeff Johnson wrote:
>
>>> But create your own virtuality reality approach if you want.
>>>
>>
>> I think you missed my point, which is that RPM packaging doesn't provide
>> facilities for what needs to be done. Postgres upstream is just more
>> honest than most in recognizing the problem. It's not the only thing
>> that ever has non-backward-compatible updates.
>>
>
> I believe that one can easily conclude
> RPM packaging doesn't provide facilities for what needs to be done
> from
> Don't attempt postgres database upgrades in packaging.
>
> You the one who wishes
> I'd just like to see a realistic approach to updates via packages.
Meaning I'd like RPM to be changed so multiple versions of packages
could co-exist, as is often necessary in practice.
> That Does Not Compute with current RPM facilities and existing postgres
> upgrade mechanisms.
Agreed, it doesn't work. Nor does any other RPM-managed update where
you need to have both old and new packages simultaneously working for a
while. The special case for the kernel is about the only place where it
even attempts to keep old versions around for an emergency fallback.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com