dnf versus yum
kevin.kofler at chello.at
Fri Jan 10 00:04:59 UTC 2014
Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Matthew Miller (mattdm at fedoraproject.org) said:
>> 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
> While documented, I do find this last bit of behavior extremely odd and
> non-intuitive. (And hardcoded, no less.)
There should just be a separate protect_running_kernel boolean option, which
would default to the above odd behavior for compatibility if not set (but
explicitly setting it to either 1 or 0 would override that either way).
More information about the devel