On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 19:47 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 22:47:18 +0000, > "\"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\"" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >b) > > > >We QA have alot of QA community members testing this so this does NOT > >require any additional effort or cause additional LOAD on the QA > >community. > > Aren't they just testing an upgrade of the default install? Correct: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_upgrade_fedup_cli_previous_desktop is the only current upgrade test case. We could plausibly extend the range somewhat to cover common package loadouts (GNOME, KDE, minimal perhaps) and common configuration wrinkles (non-US keyboard layout, encryption, a couple of different partition schemes), for _one_ upgrade method. Anything beyond that would be a bit of a stretch, I think. > I don't think people are doing any automated testing of proper obsoletes > for dropped packages, Correct. > though most problems could probably be detected. > And this still doesn't handle dropped packages that are being replaced. > > >yum upgrade is equally broken from my pov as preupgrade or fedup thus > >to me we can just as well "support" two failed upgrade mechanism or > >non et all. > > Anaconda does some tricks that get packages installed even when there > are problems that don't get handled by a normal yum update. (Or at least > used to. (With the move toward not using special stuff in anaconda, maybe > this isn't true any more.) fedup does not use anaconda in any way. anaconda didn't really do any 'tricks', IIRC, it just ran the upgrade in skip-broken mode. I don't know if fedup uses skip-broken or not. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
