Florian Festi wrote:
Hi!
While playing around with the skipbroken code I run into some problems
when transaction members are removed and the packages is readded later
on. Reason for this is that __cmp__ and __hash__ methods are
overloaded in the TransactionMember class. This means that transaction
members containing pkgs with the same pkgtup are treated as equal.
Because of this the newly added transaction members are found in the
already_seen(_removed) dicts if the old "equal" transaction members
still linger there. A similar problem exists for TsInfo.removedmembers.
The current problem could be worked around by resetting already_seen*
(as done by Jeremy's patch) and TsInfo.removedmembers (still missing)
at the begin of the depsolving. But as soon as we try to move the
skipbroken code deeper into the depsolving loop this will no longer be
sufficient. Resetting the already_seen information also means
restarting the depsolving from the start and loosing all the work we
already did.
The attached patch works around this two problems by moving to a list
(set) of transaction members that needs to be checked
(TsInfo._unresolvedMembers) and keeps it up to date. It also removes
the no longer needed already_seen* dicts and removedmembers attribute
and related methods.
The new TsInfo.resetResolved() method feature a hard=False default
behavior that keeps the already done work if this is better than
starting from scratch which may be the case after big changes (GUI
applications come to mind).
I am a bit unsure how this implementation would cope with reinstalls
(adding install and remove transaction members for the same package)
but IIRC these are not supported in yum anyway and it is currently not
possible to do such things even from the yum shell. I also guess that
some other code pieces would need work to support reinstalls.
So my main questions are:
* Does this look sane?
* Are any of the removed pieces part of the "official" yum API and
need to stay?
Florian
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Yum-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
Look good to me.
maybe it was a good idea to make some unit test to test TransactionData,
so it is easy to test that basic operations are work as expected.
Tim
_______________________________________________
Yum-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
