On Mon, 2020-03-09 at 18:11 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 5:57 PM Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 21:35:52 +0100, > > Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > With the fedora 32 release drawing near, it might be a good time to > > > check if any of your packages still have broken dependencies in the > > > fedora 32 (+testing) repositories. I've been working on just the thing > > > you need: > > (snip) > > > Is there interest in also reporting packages that should be conflicting > > but aren't? These are annoying because they fail after the transaction > > is set and have to be manually dealt with. > > This is currently out of scope, because it's not reported by DNF > repoclosure / repoquery. > > I'm also not sure how you would detect that from the package metadata > ... query all packages for their file contents, and then show > conflicts when two packages own the same file, but do not explicitly > Conflict? I think that's probably too simplistic ... Approximately like this: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/qa-misc/blob/master/f/potential_conflict.py -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
