Re: Broken dependencies script at it again

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Jesse Keating
<jkeating@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 14, 2009, at 13:53, Sam Varshavchik <mrsam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> Mike McGrath <mmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> Are people +1'ing getting rid of the broken dependencies script
>
> altogether?  or +1'ing to predicting the future and stopping it before it
>
> breaks?
>
> I thought the +1's were for putting in some circuit breakers, so
>
> that when (not if) it breaks again, it won't spam the entire package
>
> Proposed circuit breaker: if more than 5% of packages supposedly have broken
> dependencies.
>
>
> Sounds reasonable. Accepting patches if you want this done in the new
> future.

$ repoclosure -r updates | grep '^     '  | sort | uniq -c | sort -gr | head
    167      rtld(GNU_HASH)
    130      /sbin/ldconfig
    127      libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
    127      libc.so.6()(64bit)
    101      /bin/sh

on the repo... But this is not the new rawhide (it's updates on its
own) repo of
course. I'm not sure where that actually is at the moment?
Will look at how the rawhide report is created. The results belong in there.


> --
> Jes
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>



-- 
Steve Traylen

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux