dnf versus yum

Vít Ondruch vondruch at redhat.com
Mon Jan 6 11:43:50 UTC 2014

Dne 5.1.2014 22:25, Till Maas napsal(a):
> On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 01:06:16PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
>> Once upon a time, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> said:
>>> http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/cli_vs_yum.html#dnf-erase-kernel-deletes-all-packages-called-kernel
>> Frankly, that's a dumb "feature" to have the package manager know
>> "magic" things about some names.  Why is it dumb?  Because some people
>> then depend on magic "features".  Is this "feature" even documented
>> anywhere?  I don't see it in the yum man page for example.
> [...]
>> This is Unix; system programs are expected to "do what I say".  Don't
>> try to code "do what I mean" into it (because what you mean is probably
>> different from what I mean).
>> We've had kernel variant packages in the past, like kernel-smp and
>> kernel-PAE; are all variants supposed to be handled magically?  What if
>> there's a new variant?  Would not handling it in the package manager
>> magic be a release-blocker bug?
> Kernel packages are special with yum, because multiple packages are
> installed by default. With your argumentation 'dnf update kernel' should
> remove the current kernel when a new kernel is installed. Is this really
> what you expect and what dnf should do? Currently it installs a new
> kernel without removing the old one as I know it from yum.
> Regards
> Till

As far as I know, yum supports installonly packages. While yum supports 
them, there is still used special hack for kernel. This hack should be 
removed in first place.

Otherwise, I totally agree with Chris and with DNF upstream. "dnf remove 
kernel" should remove every kernel and should not behave magically.


More information about the devel mailing list