Re: Fedora Core 4

[seth vidal <skvidal phy duke edu>]

On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 03:48 +0100, Dag Wieers wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:54:49 +0100, Ralf Ertzinger
> > <fedora-devel camperquake de> wrote:
> > > I am running rawhide with smart. Enabled repos are fc-devel 0, freshrpms 0,
> > > dag -5 newrpms -5, atrpms-stable -10, atrpms-good -10, atrpms-bleeding -20 
> > > 
> > > It's heaven.
> > 
> > Maybe to you... but i have sincere doubts that using smart is helping
> > to identify real packaging problems that exist.  Has smart helped you
> > identify and report any rawhide packaging bugs?
> 
> I don't think smart is intended to be a tool to identify real packaging 
> problems. But there's a nice option that prints all unsatisfied 
> dependencies. And I hope we can extend that dialog with more details of 
> problems.
> 
> In fact this dialog has helped Dries and me to improve our repository and 
> fix a number of issues 3 days after Smart was released. Smart was also 
> able to tell what old packages were still available that had issues we 
> already fixed.
> 
> Apart from that, I don't think it's good behaviour to bail out if there is 
> a packaging problem. People may miss important updates just because 
> somewhere, someone made a mistake. It could even be due to a mirror 
> inconsistency, not something that can be fixed by a packager anyway.
> 

I think the situation where it exits with all the problems listed is
better than cheerily moving along and seemingly finishing completely
even though not all updates have been applied.

-sv