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

Re: Broken upgrade paths in FC+FE 2006-09-12



On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 11:26 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 September 2006 11:08, buildsys fedoraproject org wrote:
> >     quagga
> >       4: 0:0.98.6-1.fc4 (FC4-updates)
> >       5: 0:0.98.6-1.FC5 (FC5-updates)
> >       6: 0:0.98.6-2.1 (FC6)
> 
> The only problem here I see is going from 4 to 5, but 4 to 6 and 5 to 6 should 
> work.
[...]
> Again, only a problem going from 4 to 5, but 4 to 6 and 5 to 6 is fine.
[...]
> Same story here.

Yes, that's how the upgrade checker script currently works: it finds the
first problematic upgrade path and reports everything onwards from it
without checking later paths.

Improving this is on my TODO list, but I'm not sure if it's that useful
to also check upgrade paths that have "holes" in them such as going
directly from FC4 to FC6 -- I think it'd just add noise to the reports
making it harder to spot the actual problem.

By the way, I don't have the impression that packagers are expected to
make sure that upgrades like directly from FC(x) to FC(x+2) without
stopping at FC(x+1) do work in the first place.  Other opinions?


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