On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 19:08 -0500, Neal Becker wrote: > > I strongly believe that most users would prefer the smart behavior, or at > least the option of being asked. Specifically, if some dependencies have > problems, offer to go ahead with other packages that don't have problems. Working around broken deps is not a smart thing to automate. While there are hard deps, there maybe some soft deps that are just unknown. When testing, tests are performed with ALL the updates in place, not a smattering of them. It has been discussed many times that leaving packages in old to work around broken deps is not something that will be seen in the yum space. When yum errors, it errors on the side of protecting the user from potentially broken system states. Smart however takes a different stance, one that some users like until their system crashes in weird ways because of an odd update state. Thus far in rawhide space the gamble has paid off a bit, but once you move into released space, add in a few repos of choice, lets see how long it takes before stuff starts acting oddly w/ smart. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
