On 27. 09. 21 15:01, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 27. 09. 21 10:22, Kamil Paral wrote:
> 3. Similarly to above (perhaps exactly the same case), what happens when
> package Q (not installed) starts supplementing package P (installed),
will
> it get auto-installed or not?
No, Q will be not installed. With supplements it is difficult to known when
it appears, because that information is not on RPMDB.
While it makes sense technically, this might be quite confusing for packagers.
I've checked the status quo.
Package "reproducer_reversed" starts supplementing package "rpm". "rpm" is
installed, but "reproducer_reversed" is not.
1. dnf upgarde, no rpm update available: reproducer_reversed is not pulled in
2. dnf reinstall rpm: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
3. dnf downgrade rpm: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
4. dnf upgrade rpm: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
5. dnf upgrade, rpm update avilable: reproducer_reversed is pulled in
Would this change proposal actually change the observed behavior? In what way?
I forgot to mention, here is a copr repo with reproducer_reversed: to play with
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/churchyard/reproducer_reversed/
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
