On Mon, 2011-06-27 at 18:46 -0600, Tim Flink wrote:
> On 06/27/2011 09:13 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> >> Hi Tim,
> >>
> >> we (kamil and I) briefly went through the log, and althought we
> >> did
> >> not really find out what's the 'primary cause' of the
update's
> >> failure, we at least discovered, what do these blocks
> >>
> >> SKIPBROKEN: --> Package: erlang-js-0.5.0-2.fc15.x86_64 (f15)
> >> --> Requires: libjs.so.1()(64bit)
> >> --> Removing: js-1.70-13.fc15.x86_64 (f15)
> >> --> libjs.so.1()(64bit)
> >> --> Updated By: 1:js-1.8.5-6.fc15.x86_64 (pending)
> >> --> Not found [view ยป]
> >>
> >> mean.
> >
> > I added the description of this problem into
> >
> >
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AutoQA_tests/Depcheck#.22Not_Found.22_errors
>
> Cool, thanks.
>
> I'm still looking for more examples to put up there. If anyone knows
> of
> good ones, please pass them on.
Yeah, nice failure mode ... thanks for adding Kamil.
Do the two suggested resolutions apply for the new "Not found" error?
What would a maintainer do in this case?
Should we add something like...
Correct the dependencies
If your package failed because the dependencies of other packages changed (features they
were providing changed or were removed), update the requirements of your package or
consult it with maintainers of the corresponding third-party packages.