any ETA on fixing update dep errors related to libreoffice?

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 13:26 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:18:21 -0400 (EDT)
> "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday at crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 14 Apr 2014, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:10:04 -0400 (EDT)
> > > "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday at crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >   been seeing numerous examples of this since yesterday:
> > > >
> > > > Error: Package: 1:libreoffice-math-4.2.3.3-3.fc21.x86_64 (rawhide)
> > > >            Requires: libsaxlo.so()(64bit)
> > > >            Removing: 1:libreoffice-core-4.2.3.3-1.fc21.x86_64
> > > > (@rawhide) libsaxlo.so()(64bit)
> > > >            Updated By: 1:libreoffice-core-4.2.3.3-3.fc21.x86_64
> > > > (rawhide) Not found
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   any idea when this is going to be resolved?
> > >
> > > Tomorrow's compose. This build should fix it:
> > >
> > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=510603
> > 
> >   ok. on related topic, i know that doing the occasional rawhide
> > update will have dependency errors like this -- it just happens. but
> > is there some record of this somewhere so that i can check that
> > someone has already made a note of this and it's being addressed? i
> > feel silly asking about it when i'm pretty sure someone has already
> > noticed it and is working on it. thanks.
> 
> The daily 'rawhide report' lists all the ones that were known by the
> compose script at compose time. That email goes to test and devel
> lists. 
> 
> Additionally, if a dep issue appears in the rawhide report, it also
> mails the maintainer(s) of the packages with the issues. So, if it
> appears there it's going to the maintainers as well...
> 
> If a problem persists or is particularly bad (a very base package
> breaking a lot of things or an important security update blocked by the
> issue, etc), then it's probibly worth filing a bug and/or bringing it
> up on list to get more folks looking at it. 

and it's easy to check if someone's already noticed and fixed the
problem: just go to koji.fedoraproject.org and search for the .src.rpm
name, and see if there's a build in the last day. If there is, it was
probably to fix the problem (and you can read the changelog to confirm
that).
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net