[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Breaking deps deliberately





On Wed, 13 May 2009, drago01 wrote:

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin kofler chello at> wrote:
Colin Walters wrote:
Would it be easier to do more extensive checks only for say security
updates?  Maybe we could consider splitting fedora-updates into two
repos; fedora-updates-security and fedora-updates-all?

That doesn't really work, because security updates in Fedora are usually
not "security only" updates, but also have other changes, depend on
non-security updates, both obsolete and get obsoleted by non-security
updates etc. Having 2 separate updates repos would mean maintaining 2
separate branches of packages like Adam Williamson is describing, one with
security updates only and one with the rest. That doubles the maintainer
workload and doesn't help the case of security updates for the packages
from "all" (because the packages in "security" would have only the security
fix and not the changes previously done in "all").

+ it wont solve anything anway .. if the a dep is broken yum will
abort the whole transaction not only for the repo with the broken
deps.

well yum --skip-broken should be able to handle some of the broken deps - depending on how deeply broken things are.

-sv

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]