dnf versus yum
mattdm at fedoraproject.org
Wed Jan 8 19:46:32 UTC 2014
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:43:01PM -0500, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> >hence that is why whatever calls itself a replacement for yum should *not*
> >support destroy the running system without whatever *force switch*
> I don't like the weird partial functionality of this feature. It is
> apparently undocumented---actually, it'd be tricky to document it
> because it seems to protect some nebulous set of system facilities
> (running kernel, current yum, presumably RPM and runtime libraries;
> probably also grub; what else?).
I'm a little lost in the thread, but do you mean that yum's protected
packages functionality is undocumented? If that is what you mean, check the
man page. It says:
protected_packages This is a list of packages that yum should
never completely remove. They are protected via Obsoletes as
well as user/plugin removals.
The default is: yum glob:/etc/yum/protected.d/*.conf So any
packages which should be protected can do so by including a file
in /etc/yum/protected.d with their package name in it.
Also if this configuration is set to anything, then yum will
protect the package corresponding to the running version of the
And on _my_ system, there's a /etc/yum/protected.d/systemd.conf containing
owned by "systemd" and a gnome.conf containing gnome-shell which I think I
put there myself. (Nothing owns it and I don't remember.)
This goes an amazingly long way toward protecting the system from accidental
autophagy without really being all that complex.
> Another point: it shouldn't be hardwired into the package manager
> but rather result from package properties. I can see several ways to
> do it:
> - an 'essentiality' property in the RPM file
> - a yum/dnf configuration file specifying a set of protected packages
> - a special, unremovable 'system' package that depends on kernel and dnf
Option #2 it is.
> Last two would be preferable, because they allow tailoring the set
> of protected packages differently for a datacenter server vs. a
> network appliance, desktop, etc.
Exactly. And configuration is better than a magic package.
Matthew Miller -- Fedora Project -- <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
More information about the devel