On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 06:23:53 -0500, TH (Tom) wrote: > On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:12:43 +0100 > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > It's really a scenario where the Fedora Updates System needs to prevent a > > packager from pushing something. That has not been implemented yet, > > however. And more will need to be implemented to get it right. > > Yes, but it is the insane quest for perfection that has prevented > a trivial technique from catching 99.999% of the problems: > > Just run a test "yum update" on a virtual machine that has selected > every selectable package during the install. Only when that test update > from a test repo works cleanly would the updates actually be pushed > to the real repo. You cannot find the broken dep that way. First of all, the needed packages have been available in the updates-testing repo: alsa-lib *and* alsa-utils (which requires the new alsa-lib). Secondly, you can only catch the broken dep prior to moving _individual packages_ from updates-testing to updates. Moving alsa-lib plus alsa-utils at once would have been fine. [Only the Fedora Updates System can trigger a check fast enough when there is a request to push something to stable. An external tool could try to warn early, but it could not interrupt a pending move to stable.] For each package, you would need to set up your vm and try a yum update with an added repo, which contains the package to be moved. The hard part is to do this for hundreds of packages with inter-dependencies. -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
