Re: [Rule-list] vacuum example

[Marco Fioretti]

On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 01:10:01 at 01:10:01AM +0100, Martin Stricker 
(address@hidden) wrote:
> 
> And I have another idea/concern: Since Red Hat Linux and other distros
> are based on RPM, the RPM database stores information about each file
> installed by a RPM package. Wild vacuuming would make this database
> inconsistent with reality. I don't know if it's possible to tell the RPM
> database that some files have been deleted, but I think I would get
> errors if I tried to rpm -e a package from which I vacuumed some files.
> But that still doesn't prevent that dependency checks might go bad
> because the package to be installed depends on a vacuumed file that it
> believes to be still there... Oh well, so vacuum is for experienced
> users...
I had the same concern, but since it is for experienced users, and I
was sleepy too, I forgot to mention it: in any case however:

        1) this is one reason to run rpm --nodocs if wanted: if RPM
        vacuums by itself less inconsistencies are created

        2) If it ain't broken, it ain't enough features yet: this is
        yet one more way in which we can spot out, catalog, and query
        the packagers, who carry some of the responsibility for the
        bloat which made us come here. A vacuum list is a list of
things that they should optimize or package better. Like in "excuse
me, Mr ghostscript and mr Emacs, why in heaven do I have to carry
japanese and Korean fonts if I don't need them?"

        Ciao,
                Marco Fioretti