On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, David Malcolm wrote:
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.
maybe a bit more thourough but I wouldn't call it superior - it takes
forever to complete b/c you have to look at all those headers :(
Magic alternatives welcome.
Actually, I sometimes wonder if we could do like git does and only take
the first segment from the file's checksum and store it somewhere maybe
with the other filelist sqlite metadata. That way we could tell if we were
likely or unlikely to hit a conflict.
it is certainly not foolproof but I bet we'd be able to tell if two files
were most likely different and occupying the same path in what? 85% of the
cases? maybe more than that.
-sv
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
