On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 9:33 AM Dan Horák dan@danny.cz wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:34:16 -0400 Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 8:31 AM Dan Horák dan@danny.cz wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 11:35:52 +0200 Igor Gnatenko ignatenkobrain@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 11:31 AM Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com wrote:
There used to be sent nagging email about broken dependencies, but it is not sent anymore. I last received such email on 11th of March 2018, so probably we don't really care ...
The problem with that check is that it just checks if all dependencies are provided by other packages, but it doesn't check if they can be installed at the same time. So if I would have package with Requires: foo + Conflicts: foo, that check won't tell anything.
Same applies to rich dependencies "with", it just checks if one condition is provided by anything so this check is not useful for packages with rich dependencies at all…
IIRC the original problem was that repoclosure used yum underneath which didn't understand rich/weak deps at all. Do we still wait on a tool using dnf/libsolv to provide equivalent functionality as repoclosure?
I already ported spam-o-matic to DNF, however the multi-arch stuff
do you mean multi-lib, i.e. it would work still for non-multilib arches (eg. aarch64 or ppc64le)?
No, I meant what I said. I mean multi-arch. That is, checking across all architectures from an x86_64 host.
That said, aarch64 and ppc64le are multi-lib arches, we just don't ship it in Fedora this way.
For example, OpenMandriva is shipping armv7hnl + aarch64 multi-lib. We just don't because we started earlier when most aarch64 systems couldn't support 32-bit arm at all.