On (01/03/16 15:07), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
On 03/01/2016 02:56 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>On (01/03/16 13:30), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>On 03/01/2016 10:46 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>On (29/02/16 20:30), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>>>On 02/29/2016 07:27 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>>On (29/02/16 18:54), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>>>>>keeping the "if" branches consistent and somewhat easier
to interpret.
>>>>>>However, if you and others are more comfortable reading and using
regex(3)
>>>>>>regexes, then it's fine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>+ [ $# != 0 ] && sudo -p "$prompt" \
>>>>>>>+ yum-deprecated --assumeyes
install -- "$@" |&
>>>>>>>+ awk 'BEGIN {s=0}
>>>>>>>+ /^No package .* available.$/ {s=1}
>>>>>>>+ {print}
>>>>>>>+ END {exit s}'
>>>>>>>+ elif [[ "$DISTRO_BRANCH" == -redhat-* ]]; then
>>>>>>> [ $# != 0 ] && sudo -p "$prompt"
yum --assumeyes install -- "$@" |&
>>>>>>> # Pass input to output, fail if a missing
package is reported
>>>>>>> # TODO Remove and switch to DNF once
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I see that avoiding copy-pasting here would produce more
complicated code, so
>>>>>>it's perhaps OK. However, it would be good then to copy-paste
the comment
>>>>>>along with the TODO as well, and then perhaps add a note and a
TODO regarding
>>>>>>BZ1215208.
>>>>>>
>>>>>We will still need awk trick for old style yum on el{6,7}. Therefore
>>>>>I moved TODO to the 1st branch.
>>>>
>>>>Well, yeah, the bug is Fedora-specific, but we still need to have a
reminder
>>>>to remove the hack on RHEL as well. It will get fixed eventually.
>>>>
>>>Correct me if I'm wrong.
>>>We need to awk workaround because yum does not fail if you want to install
>>>unknown packages and there is not a bug for yum and I doubt they would
>>>fix/change it in stable distributions. Therefore we will need to have
>>>this solution there for yum anyway.
>>
>>Yes. IIRC I reported this for yum originally, but the developers moved the bug
>>to dnf (fixing it later) and refused to fix it in yum.
>>
>>I too doubt they'll fix it in stable distributions. However I expect they
will
>>get dnf into RHEL (which is handled by the bottom branch) eventually (RHEL8?),
>>and will also fix that '--' bug. That's when a note would come in
handy.
>>
>RHEL8 is far future atm. And I guess we will need to do more changes there :-)
Yes, it's far.
>>>dnf behaves correctly in this manner. However it ignores separator
"--"
>>>between arguments and packages which is tracked in BZ1215208.
>>
>>Yes, exactly.
>>
>Does it mean ACK to the last patch?
Alright, otherwise it's fine. ACK :)
Thank you
master:
* 73585f9af928913200999c5b3b983bb9266ee266
sssd-1-13:
* 8f0a510a8c324aa1fa0f318e340b554cd07baf8b
Dan,
it shouls work for you now.
report any other bugs
LS