dnf versus yum

Adam Williamson awilliam at redhat.com
Sun Jan 5 23:46:04 UTC 2014

On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 19:24 +0100, Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
> On 01/05/2014 07:07 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 10:04 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 10:27 +0100, Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
> ...
> >>> The running kernel should not be removed with a simple 'dnf erase
> >>> kernel' (why did they change remove into erase?),
> >>
> >> They didn't. Both work on both.
> >
> > It's symptomatic of how fucking terrible this thread is, btw, that
> > people would post without checking any of this. It takes about ten
> > seconds to open a kernel and run 'yum remove foo', 'yum erase foo', 'dnf
> > remove foo', 'dnf erase foo'. If you're not going to go to *that* much
> > trouble, it's a bit rich to start excoriating the dnf devs.
> As I mentioned before I only auto completed yum, remove is not party of 
> the auto completed commands. If remove should be there, then this is a 
> bug. I will file one.
> dnf has no auto completion and I have only seen reference to erase. The 
> man page of dnf does not mention remove (it mentions 'group remove'). 
> This should probably be added. I will file a bug on that one too.
> As a side not 'dnf --help' shows:
> '--version             show Yum version and exit'
> which probably also is wrong.
> This is by no mean any excoriation of the dnf devs on my part.
> Three documentation "bugs" out of a side track of a thread is not a 
> terrible thread, in my opinion...

If it exists for backward compatibility, it doesn't necessarily need to
be documented.
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net

More information about the devel mailing list