[Yum-devel] [PATCH] remove RPMDBPackageSack.installed()

[Tim Lauridsen]

seth vidal wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 13:23 +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
>   
>> Panu Matilainen wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thu, 4 Oct 2007, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Panu Matilainen wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> The problem with installed() is just that it's the wrong term for 
>>>>> this - make it exists() and it'll make sense for all the package 
>>>>> sack types. Whether a package is installed or not is just a question 
>>>>> whether it exists in rpmdb or not, if you want to keep API compat 
>>>>> just make rpmdb.installed() a wrapper for exists().
>>>>>           
>>>> Sound like a good idea, it still keeps the api simple.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Somewhat related, IMO the installed() method belongs to the package, 
>>>>> not sack object. So something like
>>>>>
>>>>> for pkg in installable:
>>>>> if self.rpmdb.installed(po=pkg):
>>>>> # do stuff
>>>>>
>>>>> would become
>>>>>
>>>>> for pkg in installable:
>>>>> if pkg.installed():
>>>>> # do stuff
>>>>>
>>>>> ..but that's another story, dunno how feasible it'd be within yum 
>>>>> currently (sorry I haven't been paying that much attention lately)
>>>>>           
>>>> Sound like a great idea, but can be tricky to implement.
>>>> a YumInstalledPackage know it is installed, but a YumAvailablePackage 
>>>> dont know if it is installed, I know it is available in a repo, but 
>>>> it dont know if it is installed on the system.
>>>>         
>>> Yup, the package object would have to know about rpmdb then which is 
>>> probably not that clean. A simple solution would be to move the 
>>> installed() method to a higher level object that knows about rpmdb, 
>>> such as YumBase. Basically
>>>
>>> class YumBase:
>>> ...
>>> def installed(self, po):
>>> return self.rpmdb.exists(po)
>>>
>>> and the above example would become
>>>
>>> for pkg in installable:
>>> if self.installed(po):
>>> # ... do stuff
>>>
>>>       
>> Sound like a good idea.
>>
>>     
>
> -1
>
> We don't need to pollute the top level name space for this. If installed
> is only a mode of something in the rpmdb then why are we moving it
> outside of the rpmsack?
>   
I see you point, and i agree :)
> When Florian proposed this whole thing on irc originally I said: 
> 1. it breaks the api if we move installed()
> 2. installed() makes no sense on PackageSackBase
> 3. if you want to check to see if a package exists inside whatever sack
> object you have then we should wrap installed() in the rpmdb around
> something like exists() in PackageSackBase and have exists take the same
> args that installed() takes now.
>
> Finally, unless there is a compelling reason we need to I do not want to
> break the api right before we're finished with Fedora 8 and while folks
> are still thinking about 3.2.X for rhel5/centos5 future releases.
>   
+100

Tim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.baseurl.org/pipermail/yum-devel/attachments/20071004/c2e818cb/attachment.htm