dnf replacing yum and dnf-yum

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 04/07/2015 07:05 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 07.04.2015 um 19:02 schrieb Marcin Juszkiewicz:
>> W dniu 07.04.2015 o 18:39, Ralf Corsepius pisze:
>>
>>> skip broken
>>> - is pushing fedora users into chaotic situations.
>>> - to cheat fedora users and to play down the "real problems".
>>>
>>> In a perfect world skip-broken should not even exist.
>>
>> In a perfect world all Fedora packages would be always installable. And
>> would not require users to use external repositories for whatever they
>> need.
>>
>> But we do not live in such one.
>>
>> For me "--best" was a switch to tell which rpmfusion packages block
>> updates (solved with manual rebuild of mplayer and all dependencies for
>> f22)
>
> but with such *defaults* you make the world *worser*
>
> * dependencies may be broken only on specific setups
> * the user don't take notice
> * the user don't get a possible important update
> * the user won't file a bugreport because he don#t know
>
> when something on my system has problems *i ant to know* that and i can
> type --skip-broken at my own to get other updates *while* write a
> bugreport to get the other problem fixed

Exactly. With dnf you would not even know there are broken packages. All 
you'd see is no updates being installed and believe everything is OK - 
In fact you are seeing the silence of death.


That said, with dnf one broken single dep of a central package would 
suffice to lock out a whole tree of packages. It doesn't really need 
much visionary power to construct such cases.

Just think about what recently has happened this week in F21: (probably 
unnoticed to the fast majority of users): Somebody pushed an 
SONAME-changing/ABI-braking update to cloog, cloog-ppl, isl.

This broke all packages which were depending the old libcloog.so. 
Seemingly there weren't any in Fedora, but 3rd party repos may carry such.

Ralf

ETC: FESCO, revert the decision to use dnf on F22 and send the dnf-devs 
back to the drawing boards.