Upgrade of unmaintained packages

[Bryan W. Headley]

Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le ven, 30/01/2004 à 16:38 -0500, seth vidal a écrit :
> 
>>>    I forgot to stick a smiley in there somewhere, caught up in
>>>frustration with yum as I was.  :-)
>>
>>so in your ideal world, what is it that yum should do when confronted
>>with a broken dependency or package?
> 
> 
> Just skip it for now. (and warn about it)
> 
> What's maddening with yum in rawhide is :
> 
> 1. a new rawhide dump is exposed with provides updates for more than a
> hundred packages 
> 2. *one* of the updates can't be applied yet because another package
> depends on the old version
> 3. yum refuses a general update because of this
> 4. user has to manually comb check-update results to find the problem
> update (the package that is not ready yet because all the stuff that
> depends on it hasn't been rebuilt), and manually generate an update
> package list for yum (basically : the full check-update list without the
> problem update). This can be fun with 200+ packages to be updated.
> 
> Of course 4 could be :
> 4. Wait for the repository to be in a self-consistent state
> 
> But :
> 1. If one uses multiple rpm sources this might never happen
> 2. On rawhide there is a high probability that by the time an update
> path has been fixed another unrelated one will be broken and block full
> update
> 
> Life would be sooo much easier if yum update warned :
> Can not update svg package because it would break abiword (fedora-
> devel), gdm (fedora-devel), gimp2 (fedora.us). Skip it ?

That's not just yum, that's apt/deb, too. The same is true, given your 
example, of one of these tools deciding, due to cascading dependencies, 
to remove 200 packages...



-- 
____               .:.                 ____
Bryan W. Headley - bwheadley at earthlink.net