1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] bug 2317 revisited: --update option should behave like --search-media
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20bug%202317%20revisited%3A%20--update%20option%20should%20behave%0A%20like%20--search-media&In-Reply-To=%3C4FE431E5.2020306%40eesti.ee%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="016729.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="016739.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] bug 2317 revisited: --update option should behave like --search-media</H1>
<B>Sander Lepik</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20bug%202317%20revisited%3A%20--update%20option%20should%20behave%0A%20like%20--search-media&In-Reply-To=%3C4FE431E5.2020306%40eesti.ee%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] bug 2317 revisited: --update option should behave like --search-media">sander.lepik at eesti.ee
</A><BR>
<I>Fri Jun 22 10:50:45 CEST 2012</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="016729.html">[Mageia-dev] bug 2317 revisited: --update option should behave like --search-media
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="016739.html">[Mageia-dev] bug 2317 revisited: --update option should behave like --search-media
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#16728">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#16728">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#16728">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#16728">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>22.06.2012 00:01, AL13N kirjutas:
><i> Op donderdag 21 juni 2012 22:21:52 schreef Sander Lepik:
</I>>><i> On Jun 21, 2012 9:10 PM, "AL13N" <<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">alien at rmail.be</A>>
</I>>><i>
</I>>>><i> so, there's 2 options:
</I>>>><i>
</I>>>><i> - testing i586 with backports enabled
</I>>>><i> - testing x86_64 without backports enabled
</I>>>><i>
</I>>>><i> this is still 2 tests, and this is sufficient.
</I>>><i> Are you serious?
</I>>><i> I've seen bugs were i586 and x86_64 doesn't work quite the same. Every arch
</I>>><i> + repo must be tested separately (be it tainted or release, i'm still not
</I>>><i> mixing backports with updates ... until you promise to do all the testing
</I>>><i> here and not bother QA;)).
</I>><i> I see...
</I>><i>
</I>><i> however, as long as backports is installed, it could still be that due to an
</I>><i> update a new dependency from release is pulled, which could conflict (or not
</I>><i> work correctly) with some of the installed backports.
</I>Like has been said for many times now, you should not backport such packages.
And about the conflicting part - well, at that point you are already on your own, at least
as i see it. Backports can break updating/upgrading, we can't avoid that (and for the same
reason backports should be cherry-picked, so you get as little trouble as possible). The
best you can do at that point is to submit a bug about broken update and maybe (just maybe)
we can submit the updated package that needs those new deps into backports too - so you can
pull it from there and get over the update problem. But this should be a rare case anyway.
><i> D. not supporting backports
</I>><i>
</I>><i> for update validation of package X (let's call it update A2):
</I>><i> 1. testing combination: A,C,E for arch i586
</I>><i> 2. testing combination: A,C,E for arch x86_64
</I>><i>
</I>><i> for backport validation of package X (let's call it backport B2):
</I>><i> No testing
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Validations required: 2 for each update
</I>><i> => this is how it is now
</I>And for updates it should stay like that.
--
Sander
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="016729.html">[Mageia-dev] bug 2317 revisited: --update option should behave like --search-media
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="016739.html">[Mageia-dev] bug 2317 revisited: --update option should behave like --search-media
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#16728">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#16728">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#16728">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#16728">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<hr>
<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev
mailing list</a><br>
</body></html>
|
