FC6 updates broken deps?

[Demond]

seth vidal wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 10:25 +0100, Thomas M Steenholdt wrote:
>   
>> Fact of the matter is, that even though people should report such
>> iregularities, it would be a lot less work for everybody, if yum would 
>> update the largest portion of updates that do not have any dependency 
>> problems. I know we've been over this like a thousand times, but I still 
>> see no valid reason not to make yum do this!
>>
>> That would cause the 1 or 2 or 3 packages with probles to be held back, 
>> not the rest.
>>
>>     
>
> and it would give users very little awareness that something didn't get
> patched.
>
> giving them a false sense of security.
>
> -sv
>
>
>   
The burden of a broken repo/updates should not be placed on the end 
user.  If there is a dependency problem, then the maintainer of the repo 
and/or package should be notified and is responsible for fixing the 
problem.  What good does it do for the end user?  If yum, pup, or pirut 
notes that packages x,y & z were not updated then no one would get a 
false sense of security (no more a false sense than when none of the 
packages are updated anyway).   Plus this would be a little more 
presentable and user friendly.

Demond - beating a dead horse