On Thursday 14 June 2007 10:43:52 Matthias Saou wrote: > Well, ultimately it would be best to prevent any kind of breakage, but > in the particular case of the updated kernel being pushed without the > newer mkinitrd it requires, the check could be much simpler : It > wouldn't check the consistency of the entire repo, nor even if the > updates pushed would break existing stuff... it would just check if > it's not pushing something broken, i.e. check if all requirements of the > packages being pushed are met. > > Not ideal, but maybe quite easy and yet very useful? But what if the requirements are being met by other things that are set to be pushed? And what if you asked to push something and the requirements were met at that time, but then somebody came along and say unpushed a broken package like mkinitrd, so that the kernel which once WAS satisfied is no longer satisfied? You can't rely upon things at the request for push time, it has to be at the actual 'process this set of requests' time, and it has to take the entire request set into account. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgpBtfz5vhHd8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
