On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 01:21:49PM -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 12:29 -0500, Neal Becker wrote: > > I don't think so. It's like this: > > > > I want to install appA. It has depB. > > > > repoA and repoB both have depB. repoA has appA. > > > > Installing (via yum, smart, or whatever) picks up appA from repoA, and depB > > from repoB. > > > > Now, repoB updates depB. No reason it shouldn't. > > > > Now, IIUC, yum gives up on this situation. It wants to update depB, but > > appA needs the old version. > > > > IIUC, not only does yum not update depB, but it _stops updating anything > > completely_. Your nightly yum upgrade stops until you notice the problem > > and manually repair it. (Correct me if I'm wrong here). > > It's because this is a safer behaviour than guessing around various > errors. You think it's wonderful, but it's far more error-prone than not > doing anything "automagically" until the problem is actually fixed. > Working around brokenness is a very slippery path to far graver and more > obscure brokenness down the line. > Perhaps it was a bad example (I don't think smart will break deps to perform an upgrade, but I could be wrong). Some interesting cases (where indeed both yum and apt fail): http://zorked.net/smart/doc/README.html#study-cases Regards, Tim -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
