Le vendredi 16 novembre 2007 à 10:41 -0500, Bill Nottingham a écrit : > Matthias Clasen (mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > > Yes, but fixing every possible application which could ever be put in a > > > scriplet to never, ever, ever fail, even in the cases when failure is > > > acceptable (and shouldn't kill the transaction) is a little beyond the > > > mandate of the FPC. ;) > > > > If scriptlet are not allowed to ever, ever, fail, then just make rpm > > ignore the exit code of scriptlets. > > scriptlets should be allowed to fail when the failure is catastrophic > enough. What that is, I'm not sure. scriptlets should be allowed to fail when the benefits of failing (fixing packages) outweigh the cost of failure (killing transactions for lots of users). Since so far the only documented failure was in rawhide (at a time I doubt rawhide was perfectly installable anyway) I question the need to hide this particular failure. If official policy was to never fail in scriplets, that should be fixed at the rpm or yum level. FPC may not be in the business of mandating code changes generally but refusing to touch our own packaging tools and embarking instead on an exhausting crusade to catch manually every single error output in our scriptlets is such an utter waste of packager time I hope no one ever mandates it in an official way. Software is there to help people not the other way around. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
