[issue217] Ampersand in suse updates filelist.xml

[Basil Chupin]

Pascal Bleser wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Basil Chupin wrote:
>> jon at Labix Tracker wrote:
>>> jon <linux.learner at gmail.com> added the comment:
>>>
>>> This is not a smart bug. This is a problem with a package in the repos
>>> that
>>> screwed the repo file. The bug for it has been files here
>>> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=207111
>>>
>>> This is not affecting just smart, but yum and rug/zypp as well
>> Sorry, but it is a smart problem.
>>
>> If smart can be brought down to its knees by a simple typo and then
>> requires manual intervention of some degree of complexity to get smart
>> to just simply function again then it is definitely a smart problem.


> Learn XML, the rpm-md metadata is broken (it is not valid XML), period.
> 
> smart could handle the issue more gracefully though, no question.

Exactly.

And I don't need to learn XML to know that smart should be able to 
handle such a situation better than it does now.


>> How it may or may not affect yam or carpet or zapp is immaterial.
> 
> Ok, if you say so.

Thanks for agreeing. How the others handle such a cockup is of no real 
concern to smart- it is up to the other packages handlers to work out 
their own ways of handling cockups.

But there is still a very basic question to all this: why isn't there a 
check made at the originating source for any errors before the file 
list/s is/are posted on the source site?

I mean, there is a site where one can check the coding of a webpage for 
any errors - http://validator.w3.org - so I would suspect that there 
would be a checker around to vet the contents of the generated xml 
files. Yes, No?

Cheers.

-- 
Paranoia is simply an optimistic outlook on life.