dnf versus yum
dridi.boukelmoune at gmail.com
Fri Jan 10 15:49:40 UTC 2014
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Dridi Boukelmoune
<dridi.boukelmoune at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:
>> 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).
> Can't the kernel package itself do that ?
> I'm thinking about the %preun section (maybe %pretrans ?) where the
> package would know it's being removed, and could find out whether it's
> the running kernel.
> One might also want to build a distribution on top of yum/rpm but
> choose a different name for the kernel package like "linux" or
This reminds me that yum is built on top of rpm, and rpm doesn't mean
linux. I remember my first time on AIX, and the surprising (yet unpleasant)
fact that I had to use (a very old version of) rpm.
> RPM is a core component of many Linux distributions, such as Red Hat
> Enterprise Linux, the Fedora Project, SUSE Linux Enterprise, openSUSE,
> CentOS, Meego, Mageia and many others.
> It is also used on many other operating systems as well
> But RPM is also used for software packaging on many other Unix operating
> systems like FreeBSD, Sun OpenSolaris, IBM AIX and Apple Mac OS X
> through the cross-platform Unix software distribution OpenPKG.
I actually remember a comparison matrix of OpenSolaris forks, some of
them chose /rpm5?/ for package management, but I can't find a link.
I do understand why people would want such features built-in, but it
seems a bit short-sighted. And by short-sighted I don't mean a bad
idea, I mean restricted to Fedora/RHEL and very close distributions. I
don't know yum's goals, but the man page yum(8) and the faq don''t
seem to mention any tight coupling to rhel-like linux distribution.
Again, I'm not saying this would be a bad thing. AFAICT yum is tied
*by essence* to rhel, but I'm also wondering what upstream thinks
about portability, because the whole kernel issue is a portability no-no.
>> Kevin Kofler
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
More information about the devel