#116: Clarify https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Mediakit_FileConflicts to say that explicit Conflicts: are acceptable -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- Reporter: adamwill | Owner: rhe Type: defect | Status: reopened Priority: major | Milestone: Component: Wiki | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- Comment (by clumens): > As of FC13 (from what I recall), package dependency errors are presented to the user, the user can ''ignore'', or go ''back'' to change package selections. Package conflicts are treated similarly. > > File conflicts are also presented to the user, but they cannot be ignored. The user must return to the package selection screen and manually resolve the conflicts. > > I don't believe any of the behaviors changes whether the conflicts/deps are present in the repostep package groups, or during manual package selection. This is mostly correct. If packages have conflicts, I believe rpm will raise a rpm.RPMPROB_CONFLICT, which anaconda will catch and display just like any other rpm error. This means it gets handled the same way as file conflicts, disk space, and some bizarre seldom-seen error conditions. You'll get the dialog telling you to go back and change package selections. > > * What does anaconda do if packages within any of the pre-defined install groups have declared conflicts (Conflicts: tags) > > > > * What does anaconda do if you manually select conflicting packages in the package selection interface - both declared and undeclared cases? In these two cases, it should act as I described above - the same way as file conflicts, basically. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/116#comment:6> Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa> Fedora Quality Assurance -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
