On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 03:48 +0100, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:54:49 +0100, Ralf Ertzinger
> <fedora-devel(a)camperquake.de> wrote:
> > I am running rawhide with smart. Enabled repos are fc-devel@0, freshrpms@0,
> > dag@-5 newrpms@-5, atrpms-stable@-10, atrpms-good@-10, atrpms-bleeding@-20.
> >
> > It's heaven.
>
> Maybe to you... but i have sincere doubts that using smart is helping
> to identify real packaging problems that exist. Has smart helped you
> identify and report any rawhide packaging bugs?
I don't think smart is intended to be a tool to identify real packaging
problems. But there's a nice option that prints all unsatisfied
dependencies. And I hope we can extend that dialog with more details of
problems.
In fact this dialog has helped Dries and me to improve our repository and
fix a number of issues 3 days after Smart was released. Smart was also
able to tell what old packages were still available that had issues we
already fixed.
Apart from that, I don't think it's good behaviour to bail out if there is
a packaging problem. People may miss important updates just because
somewhere, someone made a mistake. It could even be due to a mirror
inconsistency, not something that can be fixed by a packager anyway.
I think the situation where it exits with all the problems listed is
better than cheerily moving along and seemingly finishing completely
even though not all updates have been applied.
-sv