include advisories for amazon linux extras #268
Conversation
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hello @piax93
Thanks for your work.
Look good.
I left small comments. Take a look, please.
* more expressive variable name for "extras flag" * avoid overwriting `url` variable * add a couple more comments
|
How do we distinguish between regular packages and extras packages? I think we need to apply the extras advisories only to extras packages. |
|
@knqyf263 mmm, that's a good point, as many package names will be the same of what's available via the main channel. In terms of distinguishing the advisories, that's pretty easy, as they have a different numbering format, i.e. |
For example, Golang has the same major version for standard and extras packages, right? |
|
That's true as well, instead of "major version" I should have probably said "non-patch version", although that may make things even more complicated... Maybe the least terrible option is just to keep the comparison as is, and give the option to users to include the extras advisories through some parameter. |
|
Ideally, we'd want to identify the extras packages somehow, but we don't know of a good way to do it yet. An option for |
|
I'll close this as it's pretty much lost in the sands of time. |
This fixes #267.
The implementation is not terribly fast, as it iterates through a bunch of URLs. On a very standard home internet connection it still completes in just about under a minute, which seems reasonable for something which is going to run just a few times a day. I can work on parallelizing it if you are aiming for a bit higher performance target.