F22 System Wide Change: Replace Yum With DNF

Vít Ondruch vondruch at redhat.com
Thu Jun 12 12:26:32 UTC 2014

Dne 11.6.2014 17:20, Jan Zelený napsal(a):
> On 11. 6. 2014 at 09:02:29, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> Hi
>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 8:52 AM, Matthew Miller  wrote:
>>> This is kind of sentimental, and I think possibly Seth would not have
>>> liked
>>> to have a big deal made of it, but... I guess I'm going to anyway. I would
>>> like to keep the "yum" name in remembrance of his contributions. This
> also
>>> seems like the easiest path for all of the documentation, scripts, and
>>> user
>>> habits out there. I don't mind if the backend package is called "dnf", but
>>> why not keep /usr/bin/yum as the primary command and just do the right
>>> thing, only warning on incompatible usage rather than nagging every
> time
>>> it
>>> is used?
>> I strongly agree with this for practical reasons.  There is no good
>> rationale for moving away from yum as the name of the command except
> some
>> of the command line changes which happened with yum anyway (download
> only
>> was added and later removed for example) and one can warn specifically for
>> those.  The API changes are not something users care about.  Also, dnf
>> needs to drop all the legacy options before the transition (ie)  pick erase
>> or remove (preferably the latter) etc rather than retain all the
>> compatibility options.
> The transition period is one reason why we want to keep the name dnf. We'd
> basically like to keep current yum around for users that have various scripts
> and stuff depending on it so they have some time to migrate to dnf.
> Also presenting dnf as a separate project forked from yum gives us better
> flexibility - for instance it's easier to drop obsoleted stuff because users
> don't have that high compatibility expectations.
> Thanks
> Jan

I, for one, support this change as it was proposed.


More information about the devel mailing list