On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 22:47:31 +0200
Michael Schwendt <mschwendt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Obviously. ;) If the Rawhide broken deps report had found it,
breakage could have been avoided.
A different try:
Or file it in the infrastructure tracker instead? I don't know. There
are lots of active tickets in both.
Rawhide/branched broken dep reports use the 'spam-o-matic' script in
the mash package:
which in turn seems to import the yum 'repoclosure' util.
So, I'd say try and duplicate it with repoclosure and then file against
And what about DNF? Are the DNF developers interesting in looking
it, too? Or is by design that the "Dependencies resolved" step doesn't
discover the unresolvable dependency?
Of course the above is a short term thing, we should look at what we
might replace spam-o-matic with that is dnf based.
There is a dnf repoclosure plugin, but not sure how well it works off