dnf replacing yum and dnf-yum

[Petr Spacek]

On 8.4.2015 17:36, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> On 04/08/2015 08:39 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
>> On 8. 4. 2015 at 10:26:51, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> Am 08.04.2015 um 08:41 schrieb Jan Zelený:
>>>
>>>> Putting the opinion of myself and the dnf team aside, I'd like to point
>>>> out
>>>> that the information you want is still available - dnf check-update will
>>>> show you all the updates, even those that have broken deps. Running this
>>>> command right after dnf upgrade will list you those that could not be
>>>> installed
>>> the world don't work that way
>>>
>>> *nobody* even not myself would call "dnf check-update" after "dnf
>>> upgrade" installed updates and did not complain about anything
>> You are right, people use it the other way - we have had reports stating that
>> dnf check-update shows packages that dnf upgrade doesn't select. In other
>> words, the information about broken updates is still available to the user.
>>
> Perhaps dnf should keep track whether it had to 'skip-broken' , and report
> packages that were skipped during the update?

I very much agree with this. As a user, I expect that 'dnf upgrade' will give
me latest packages and that DNF will tell me the fact that newer packages are
available but not installable.

Maybe it could have a form of plugin, at least for the beginning?

> I agree with Harald that invoking it quietly is the wrong thing to do. I have
> an extensive set of repositories (Fedora, Fusion, local, src/debug) and I had
> to "yum --skip-broken" disturbingly often.

-- 
Petr Spacek  @  Red Hat