On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 18:41:59 +0530, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I guess something like, if a package that is in @base or @core, is part > of the transaction set, install it first, would work? The installer, > could work in two stages. The first stage gets you basic bootstrappable > system. This is a small number of packages + boot loader write, so a > failure due to issues like a bad burn is minimized. So even if the > subsequence stage fails (bad media, missing packages etc), you still get > something you can work with and a restart could possibly resume the > installation as well. > > Currently, failures can and often does leave you with a system that > doesn't boot. Not very ideal. But even within core there may be orders that packages need to be in. It looks like using requires is the correct way to do this. I think the problem is that a lot of packagers may not be aware that you need to do separate requires for package scripts. It isn't a mistake that they are likely to see in testing. Does rpmlint look for things like that? -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
