Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras Development

[Michael Schwendt]

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:53:31 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:

> Le mercredi 19 octobre 2005 à 16:23 +0200, Michael Schwendt a écrit :
> > On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 00:45:02 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > 
> > > Here's the list of problems in the Fedora Extras devel trees found by a
> > > slightly modified repoclosure script:
> > 
> > Today's run plus different formatting:
> 
> Can you make it a bit more compact ?

Can you give an example of what a broken dependency report should look
like instead?

How about a summary at the top of the mail listing only the
package-version-release.arch names (sorted alphabetically) and the
detailed list at the bottom?

> I don't care if the header is longuer, but all those "package:" and
> "unresolve deps" are getting on my nerves after a while.
> 
> Plus you quickly loose where you're on the list and what repo you're
> reading about.

The repo is in every "package" line to the very right:

package: p0f - 2.0.5-3.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386
  unresolved deps: 
     libpcap.so.0.8.3

So far I've thought that every "package" unit is short and to the point in
listing all the details a package would want to know.