James Laska wrote:
On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 12:36 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Again, you're extrapolating way too far from a single problem case. The
> > problem is simply that we have the xorg-x11-drivers metapackage which
> > requires every single X driver and is in the critpath. There's various
> > ways we could adjust this so it's no longer the case. It's hardly
> > something that renders an entire policy invalid.
>
> Another example for how the critical path policy breaks things:
>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/firstboot-1.113-4.fc14
> This update adds support for xfwm4 and openbox to the firstboot code.
> Updates for those 2 window managers:
>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xfwm4-4.6.2-2.fc14
>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openbox-3.4.11.2-4.fc14 ...
> I CANNOT push the firstboot update which UNBREAKS those 2 spins
because
> of the update policy. So instead of preventing breakage, the policy
> CAUSES breakage! How can it fail more spectacularly for you to finally
> realize it's a failure?
In retrospect, if the three updates you list were in fact
interdependent, should they have been submitted and tested as a group to
avoid the current situation?
Yes.
-- Rex