On Mon, 2015-04-13 at 08:47 +0200, Mathieu Bridon wrote: > Le dimanche 12 avril 2015 à 17:06 -0700, Adam Williamson a écrit : > > > > It's hard to see how you build a perfect dep check other than > > trying > > to solve the deps of *every single package in the distro* against > > every proposed update. > > Can't we run repoclosure on (at the same time) the fedora repo, the > updates repo, and a temporary repo made of the packages to be pushed? > > Repoclosure does check for the deps of every single package in the > set > of repos it is provided. Not sure offhand if we've looked into using repoclosure to check this, but one obvious issue I can think of is, what if repoclosure isn't clean *to start with*? Do you diff the outputs and try to decide whether things got better or worse? And what exactly do you do when decide things got worse? Parse the repoclosure and try to guess which of the updates to blame? That's already complex enough, I guess, that we can't expect it to be 100%. I hope this discussion is illustrating that my initial point was accurate: any proposal which relies on the existence of a 100% reliable depcheck is a problematic proposal. :) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
