On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 06:39:38PM -0000, Luca Boccassi wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 07:26:47PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
2) The proposal is built around using the package NVR to indicate
where it came from. But those names aren't unique. In some cases
it'll work, but in cases where the noted package cannot be found or
has been reaped or is just otherwise unavailable, you're back to
asking for a reproducer on a Fedora release, right? Does the NVR data
save much work over having build-ID plus debuginfod? That's not
rhetorical? I don't have many bug reports that are not resolvable by
just talking through a reproducer and seeing it happen locally, but I
know I'm not a control case.
Isn't the combination of distro name + distro version + package name
+ package version + package arch enough to uniquely identify? Are
there cases where there can be duplicates in Fedora? Speaking of the
Debian case, the distro version isn't even needed, you won't have
duplicates even across multiple releases.
It depends on how wide of a net you cast. Since package naming is
user-controlled and distribution-wide rules are enforced by disparate
build systems and environments, an NVR (or NEVRA) is not unique. It's
close to unique, but it can't be guaranteed.
--
David Cantrell <dcantrell@xxxxxxxxxx>
Red Hat, Inc. | Boston, MA | EST5EDT
_______________________________________________
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
