What was the problem with audacious again ?
# yum install audacious ... Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package audacious.i386 0:1.3.2-5.el5.rf set to be updated --> Processing Dependency: audacious-plugins >= 1.3.0 for package: audacious ... --> Missing Dependency: audacious-plugins >= 1.3.0 is needed by package audacious-1.3.2-5.el5.rf.i386 (rpmforge) ... Error: Missing Dependency: audacious-plugins >= 1.3.0 is needed by package audacious-1.3.2-5.el5.rf.i386 (rpmforge)
We publish buildlogs. There is no reason to find it out yourself. I also do not build from the SRPM, I build from the SPEC file directly, so if an SRPM is published, it is because it build fine.
I also build from the SPEC + tarball. I took them from RF and... ...they don't build!
When they *did* build, it was maybe 2007. Now it's 2009 and EL5.3 and... it doesn't build :-(
Oh, I agree completely. So when are you going to help us?
When I'll have a better brain able of a better time management for my life :-(
If a SRPMS builds under CentOS 5.0 and it doesn't under 5.3,then this package is broekn.
Ok, you're making it yourself very hard now, but I will accept scripts/tools that can verify this. I don't think any other repository is even doing this though.
Now you're wrong. You must be wrong.
Say, TUV releases EL5.3. I am *sure* they rebuild *all* the packages, not only whatever was affected on the way from 5.2->5.3.
This is what *each* and every repo should be doing when EL releases a point update: to rebuild EVERYTHING, just to check it still works.
See, this is why I am not a QA manager anywhere: people would commit mass suicide under my rule :-)
That's a strange position. So you complain because you see the flaws, but you only want to help when there are no flaws and in fact there is nothing to fix.
That's malicious. OK, you're within your rights.
Wait. So you blame me for all these things that you don't care about for your own repository ? :-)
I don't say I don't care. This is my first repo ever, so it *might* be broken already. I'd say it's *likely* to be broken!
Hey, I am not Dag! (The last time I checked my ID it carried a different name.)
Can you give me an example of an SRPM that doesn't build. Because we have buildlogs of everything, so everything at least once build.
Probably, that comix thing. I only tried to build from SPEC + tarball, because these are the *real* sources, right?
Then, audacious should be rebuilt to spit out those plugins too.
I don't see the point in trying to rebuild everything for RHEL5.3, RHEL5.4.
That's BECAUSE YOUR REPO SAYS "FOR EL5", AND THE CURRENT VERSION IS 5.3.
You can't claim compatibility when no check is made!!!
So you are just lazy and you want me to do your dirty work, unless it is something simple, then you do it yourself. Regardless you prefer to complain :)
*My* dirty work? (Dirty?!)
It is not. Everything that works, works. The things that do not work, can be fixed.
#define _it_works _installs_from_RPM & _runs & _rebuilds_from_SRPM & _rebuilds_from_SPEC_n_tarball
Can you please list them. I like statistics.
I can't, because only a freak would try to check 7,600 packages on his own laptop! (I doubt I'd even have enough disk space.)
Cheers, R-C (C'est la vie, I know./)
__________________________________________________________________ Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com