dnf versus yum

[Reindl Harald]

Am 06.01.2014 16:12, schrieb Tomas Mlcoch:
>> Am 06.01.2014 14:06, schrieb Vít Ondruch:
>>> Also, I'd like to point out that "yum/dnf remove" by default shows what it
>>> is going to do and you have to
>>> explicitly confirm the action, isn't it enough? How much protection do you
>>> need?
>>
>> to say it clear - *all* protection to avoid breaking the system
>> otherwise as example i would not have learned which packages can
>> be removed resulting in strip down some Fedora servers to 600 MB
>>
>> what *never* must happen is that YUM or DNF are killing itself, rpm
>> or render the setup unbootable - period - there is *nothing* to discuss
> 
> Hm, so the rm should refuse to do "rm /usr/bin/rm", chmod: "chmod -x /usr/bin/chmod", etc., am I getting it right?

is "rm" supposed to work this way?
is "rm" supposed to be replaced by dnf?
is "rm" used to solve dependencies?
is "rm" responsible for a consistent package managment?

i guess no because "rm" is not a package-manager someone tries to rewrite



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 246 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140106/cb58c13d/attachment.sig>