yum: rpm_check_debug vs. depsolve: rhnlib needs python(abi) = 2.4

[Jon Ciesla]

Posting Jeff's +1 Insightful back to the list I inadvetently hijacked the
topic from. :)

> On 11/1/07, Jon Ciesla <limb at jcomserv.net> wrote:
>> Agreed.  I wouldn't want to pull something off someone's system just
>> because Fedora stopped carrying it, if the user finds it useful.  In the
>> case of an abi dep, like rhnlib and python, yum sees that the upgrade
>> will
>> break rhnlib, so won't do it with rhnlib there, which is The Right Thing
>> To Do.  Maybe we just leave all as it is, and add a list of dead
>> packages
>> to the release notes for each release, so you know what to pull
>> beforehand
>> if you want.
>
> We need to carry around information as to what the Fedora "repository"
> has stopped carrying as an optional repository metadata. Once we do
> that, we can teach clientside tools to parse such repository level
> data and then local admins can decide how to deal with packages which
> are no longer being provided.
>
> We could use this sort of metadata to inform users about orphaned as
> well as deprecated packages on a repository by repository basis.
>
> -jef
>


-- 
novus ordo absurdum