yum --skip-broken update by default?

[Seth Vidal]

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, John Ellson wrote:

> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>>>>> "JE" == John Ellson <john.ellson at comcast.net> writes:
>>>>>>> 
>> 
>> JE> Why?  Thats a dumb way to select features.  Make them not-conflict
>> JE> and provide some kind of configuration option.
>> 
>> Because there have been certain difficulties in getting these packages
>> to live with each other, requiring various finessing which as I
>> understand things has been progressing.
>> 
>> I mean, come on, two syslog daemons?  Each needing to own (and do
>> things like provide log rotation for) the same files?  Alternatives
>> isn't going to handle that, you know.  And as I understand it, there
>> are actually three syslog daemons people might want to use, all with
>> the same issues.  You make it sound as if these things have absolutely
>> trivial solutions, and the only reason for making them conflict is to
>> annoy you.  Do you even allow for the possibility that there's an
>> actual difficult issue here?
>>
>>  - J<
>>
>> 
> Sure I allow that. But we're off track.   My primary complaint is that this 
> dependency conflict
> isn't listed in the daily yum updates dependency list and that yum doesn't 
> deal with it automatically.

How would you recommend it be dealt with? And remember we have to have an 
acceptable behavior for 'yum -y update'.


When there is a conflict should we:
1. assume the existing pkgs are better
or
2. assume the installing pkgs are better


argument in favor of 1 is that the existing pkgs are on the system and 
should therefore be protected as a possible running service.

argument in favor of 2 is that the user is requesting an action and the 
user knows best, therefore the requested action must be the 'best' action.

I bet out of 1000 fedora users I'll get an almost even split between them.
-sv