On Thu, 2009-09-17 at 09:57 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2009, David Malcolm wrote: > > > On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 18:45 -0400, Neal Becker wrote: > >> Which makes me wonder, how could this conflict have been avoided? Is there > >> a tool that would check any new package to see if any object* in it would > >> conflict with any existing package? If not, sounds like a good thing to > >> have. > >> > >> * Here, object means filesystem object. I'm not sure if there are any other > >> types of objects to worry about. > > Brainstorming: a script that walks the yum repo's filelist.tar.gz, and > > figures out a list of filename collisions, filtering by directories in > > the default PATH > > > > > > Attached is a first pass at a python script that does this. > > > > Output from the script when run upon [1] is below. Caveat: the script > > probably has bugs. > > > > Does this look useful? > > David, > Yes it does look useful. > > I wrote something similar: > > http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/potential_conflict.py > > which is what I believe autoqa is starting from for their file conflict > checker. Aha! Your approach looks superior, as you're leveraging all that extra info from the RPM headers about file hashes etc. Thanks. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
