On 24/02/14 06:29, Susi Lehtola wrote:
On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 18:12:55 +0100
Reindl Harald <h.reindl(a)thelounge.net> wrote:
>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-2922/libreoffice-4.2....
>
> how can people pretend "installation went smoothly, no issue detected during
basic
> document manipulation" for packages which are not installable at all due
> dependencie problems?
People *couldn't* know there were problems, because all the positive
reports were from the time the update was in updates-testing. All who
tried the update, also had the dependency available in updates-testing.
For what it's worth, my report (the first with the dependency issue) and
a subsequent one were also from updates-testing, and both did not have
the dependency available.
I did do a manual check of Koji and Bodhi to try and figure out why my
results were different from the previous testers, and could only find
the necessary build in Koji, which quite frankly left me very confused
and unsure if I was experiencing some kind of mirror sync issue and/or
chronic lack of coffee syndrome. I now understand the initial positive
karma results had something to do with a buildroot override. I probably
should have left negative karma or somesuch, but as the update was
already going to stable regardless and I wasn't sure if I was doing
something wrong, I just left a neutral comment.
One more thing I was confused by was how the update passed the AutoQA
depcheck tests, which I understood (probably incorrectly) were meant to
catch things like this. In fact, the AutoQA test results for the update
actually show the dependency issue,[1] so I'm not sure what was going on
there.
--
Regards,
Theodore Lee/"antiaircraft"
[1]
http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/report/1cafn