On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 03:01:46PM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote: > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Michael Stenner wrote: > > That particular check covers MANY problems and it is not always possible > > to know precisely which of them is happening. > > Ok, it's not always possible... so instead it will _NEVER_ be reported > even when it _IS_ possible? It is a single check. It's like saying "is dad home from work on time?" Yes or no. If the answer is no, you cannot distinguish between "he had to work late", "he's bringing home a pizza", "he was carjacked", etc. > If a patch was offered to handle this issue in the cases where it _IS_ > possible, would it be rejected outright then? Certainly not rejected outright. That's not the same as guaranteeing acceptance, though. It depends on the quality of the patche, as usual. Given that this code would only run when yum has already decided to bail, I don't see how it could do much harm. You'd have to do further checks. If you want to pursue that and do it in a clean and tidy way, then your code would likely be accepted. However, that chunk of code is already gone from HEAD, so your patches would only apply to yum 2.0.X. I don't think it's worth it (which is why I haven't done it myself) but you're welcome to dive in. -Michael -- Michael D. Stenner mstenner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ECE Department, the University of Arizona 520-626-1619 1230 E. Speedway Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85721-0104 ECE 524G
