[wplug] RPM question - How to make it use a newer lib file than it's expecting

[Vanco, Don]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: wplug-bounces+don.vanco=agilysys.com at wplug.org 
>[mailto:wplug-bounces+don.vanco=agilysys.com at wplug.org] On 
>Behalf Of Brian Sammon
>Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 1:50 PM
>To: General user list
>Subject: Re: [wplug] RPM question - How to make it use a newer 
>lib file than it's expecting
>
>
>> In Debian, there's an "oldlibs" collection of packages that 
>contains a package 
>> of libssl0.9.6 that you can install next to libssl0.9.7.  
>Are you sure that 
>> Redhat/Fedora/WhateverYoureUsing doesn't have a similar thing?
>
>Another thought -- if you can't find a version of libssl 0.9.6 
>designed to 
>coexist with 0.9.7, it _is_ possible to install two different 
>versions of a 
>package.  If you have one version of the package installed, 
>you can attempt to 
>install a second version in addition by using "rpm --install" 
>instead of "rpm 
>--upgrade"  Often, you find that there's a file conflict 
>between the two 
>versions of the package.  Then you have to read the error 
>message and figure 
>out whether the file(s) in conflict is important and which 
>version of the 
>files you would like to have.  If you want the files from version b to 
>overwrite the files from version a, install version b last, 
>and pass the 
>"--replacefiles" option to rpm.

IMO: you are better off using the rpm tools to redirect the installation
(directories) rather than fiddle like this.  Either way - you're gonna
end up with a efed up RPM database and can expect all kinds of issues /
complaints from rpm/Yum/Up2Date.  It's been stated that these can
co-exist, it's just trying to keep RPM happy that's the pain.....

Don