From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016692.html | 138 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 138 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016692.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016692.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016692.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016692.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e70f96963 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016692.html @@ -0,0 +1,138 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] bug 2317 revisited: --update option should behave like --search-media + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] bug 2317 revisited: --update option should behave like --search-media

+ AL13N + alien at rmail.be +
+ Thu Jun 21 12:35:59 CEST 2012 +

+
+ +
see https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2317
+
+in short:
+I've provided a patch which does this, but there is discussion about it.
+Since the patch seems to indicate a change of behavior, people there
+requested this be mailed to -dev ML.
+
+so, it's about having new dependencies when you're doing updates and those
+dependencies are not in the update media.
+
+The way I see it, there 2 opinions:
+A. fetch dependencies only from enabled release/update repositories
+Problems:
+ - patch doesn't exist yet and code complexity is alot higher
+ - if backports are enabled, a dependency fetched from release could
+conflict with other installed (from backports or other). thus the update
+would fail.
+
+Solutions for this:
+ - this is not cleanly solvable, we would have to remove the backport.
+
+B. fetch dependencies only from enabled repositories
+Problems:
+ - if backports are enabled, dependencies could come from backports
+instead of release.
+
+Solutions for this:
+ - this can be prevented in various ways: even as simple as the backport
+packager to bump an update with stricter requires so that the backport
+wouldn't be fetched (_IF_ it indeed would be incompatible) AND the update
+could have stricter requires for that new dependency.
+
+
+IMHO, it's very simple: we should choose B because if you have backports
+enabled, you'd want the backport to be pulled for new dependency (IF it
+doesn't conflict).
+
+(in the above i state backports, but it could be any enabled repository,
+like testing, or even 3rd party repos.)
+
+In short, we shouldn't be thinking of cherrypicking backports, and if
+users are trusting repositories, we should be using them.
+
+since QA is waiting for a fix for this for a long time (pre-mga1), we
+should get this fixed asap.
+
+PS: since we're enabling backports, we should make sure that the update
+validation process would have one of both required tests for validation
+with backports enabled and the other disabled.
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1