On 4/3/20 6:09 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 07:48, Samuel Sieb <samuel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
The problem is that in the past there have been some packages that have
had to be updated first to successfully do the upgrade.
So we list them with versions and do a deterministic check. Being told
over and over and again "you need to make sure everything is up to
date before upgrading" just isn't specific enough. e.g.
[...snip...]
Asking the user to download 2Gb of updates so that they can download
2Gb of upgrades is just bad. If we need a "fixed" rpm of a specific
version, we need to check for that version or newer. If we need to
check that a specific package is not installed, then we check that
package isn't installed.
/me the gnome-software maintainer, that actually cares that a
recommendation is actually possible to encode into code.
I understand that, but it's a very difficult problem. QA can't test
every possible random combination of updates, so only a fully up-to-date
system is tested for upgrades. Personally, I make sure dnf, systemd,
repos, and release are updated before doing an upgrade. That's worked
for me so far, but I'm capable of fixing things if something goes wrong.
Although now that offline upgrades are the default, it's a lot safer.
_______________________________________________
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
