False positive dependency checks break package install order

Jeffrey Johnson n3npq at me.com
Tue Aug 13 20:55:52 CEST 2013

On Aug 13, 2013, at 1:55 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:

> Even if probablity reduction fixes the problem for now, I will apply Jacek's
> patch to rpm in PLD (with s/rpmbfFree/rpmfiFree/). Just changing Bloom
> filter parameters won't mean that the problem is gone, it will just make it
> harder to occur and I want stable installation order, always.

See my other mail.

You may do whatever you wish: the Bloom filter implementation was planned
5y ago, discussed @rpm5.org when implemented ~3y ago, and there were
(at least) 2 members from PLD who had a chance to point out
flaws in my reasoning, or to suggest a different approach.

I also believe that you need to think through the consequences of false positives
far more carefully before pledging allegience to PLD members patches.

Again, you can/will do whatever you wish, I really do not care. You had
timely responses with accurate information to reported problems from me.
That is my only "obligation".

73 de Jeff

More information about the pld-devel-en mailing list