On Jan 19, 2014 8:57 PM, "Michael Schwendt" <mschwe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 20:32:26 +0200, Jonathan Dieter wrote: > > > If scriptlet failures weren't fatal, we wouldn't have the problem we > > have now with duplicate packages. We could have just pushed the selinux > > update, > > After installing the previous bad update that breaks scriptlets, how would > you activate the new selinux policy within the fixed package's %post scriptlet? > Instead of updating to the package in permissive mode, you would need to > run the scriptlet contents manually *and* still reinstall any package were > the scriptlets failed.
I was focusing on the fact that scriptlet failures lead to duplicates in the rpm database, but, you're right, it's not the main problem. I still think there's a good case for making scriptlet errors non - fatal, but, in this situation, it would have had a minimal benefit. > > [...] then bumped the release for all updates in the last few pushes, > > and then rebuilt them. > > How do you know which packages a user has tried to install/update _after_ > updating to the bad policy package? It could be any package within the package > collection that would remain installed but broken because of the scriptlets bug. > You assume that users have only applied the few updates following the bad > selinux policy update. ACK. I didn't think this part through properly. Jonathan
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
