Am Freitag, den 28.12.2007, 21:23 +0100 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis: > On 28.12.2007 20:34, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 28, 2007 at 03:25:13PM -0400, Xavier Lamien wrote: > >> 2007/12/28, Christoph Wickert <christoph.wickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > >>> Raleigh, we have a problem... > >>> > >>> python-gammu, which is required by wammu, prevents users from updating > >>> to the latest gammu release for several days now. It has already been > >>> reported in Bugzilla, see > >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426848 and - even more > >>> interesting - > >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=425831 > > Well, the EPEL report (the second one) has not much in common with the > Fedora report. Just coincidence afaics. You are correct, I did not look carefully enough. But IMO it's the same problem, no matter if it is libGammu.so.1 or libGammu.so.2. > >> I Agree this should not happen but, ask first why there is a broken deps on > >> some packages and why this happen. > > It is no great mystery. People are fallible & make packaging mistakes sometimes. > > Agreed, but... > > > The various automated scripts for sanity checking Fedora repos don't always > > catch every broken thing because they too are written by people who are fallible. > > ...there are afaik no scripts that would have detected such a problem, > and that's not good (tm), lead to this specific problem and IMHO should > be fixed. A simple diff between the old and the new provides send to the > gammu owner my mail might have told him "hmm, maybe other packages > depend on that .so file; I should check this with repoquery before I > push this to stable"; that might have helped to solve the problem in time. > > The second big problem: why wasn't this reported earlier? Does nobody > use updates-testing? Or did non of the updates-testing users report the > problem? As Kevin and me already wrote this update went directly to stable > Part of this problem maybe: where is the best place to report > such issue these days: bodhi comment or bug entry in bugzilla? Not sure what is better, but in this case there has been both: two comments in bodhi and two comments in the bugzilla bugs. > > Cu > knurd > Christoph -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
