[packagekit] exclude some upgrades

David Zeuthen david at fubar.dk
Mon Nov 12 12:34:43 PST 2007

On Mon, 2007-11-12 at 20:29 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > This allows the user to understand what's going on. Advanced users
> will
> > realize that if they remove kmod-nvidia and kmod-ntfs and make their
> > system safe.
> I don't think that's a valid argument - I wouldn't remove kmod-nvidia
> just for a new kernel, I would just wait for livna to update. What if it
> wasn't the case of removing one kmod, but you had to remove all of
> openoffice because of a libneon security update?

I think this is a decision the user needs to make. Pretending you can
make it for them is a bit arrogant. Not even informing them of the
vulnerability is even worse bordering labeling PackageKit as insecure.

> > Or, you know, go and punk the providers of the packages
> > that block. If you're feeling more cracktastic including a 'file a bug'
> > button that automagically files a bug.
> That really doesn't scale. Can you imagine closing 4500+ bugs of
> "yesterdays rawhide didn't depsolve"?

I sure can! Seriously, it's something you'd want to turn off in e.g.
Rawhide but I think it could be useful in stable Fedora. For RHEL, I'd
probably turn it off; it's more of a community distro feature. YMMV.

Think of it this way; bug loads are going to continually increase
_anyway_ for any distro as Linux becomes more and more popular. This may
just be the nudge in a direction where bugmasters actually go a write
software to handle auto-filed bugs and/or the maintainers avoid making
such annoying mistakes. In a way this is no different from bug-buddy.


More information about the PackageKit mailing list