another dnf kernel issue?

Christopher Meng cickumqt at gmail.com
Wed Feb 11 09:44:18 UTC 2015


On Tuesday, February 10, 2015, Radek Holy <rholy at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Does "sudo dnf remove kernel*-3.18.3*" work for you?
>
> From the DNF's persepective (
> http://dnf.readthedocs.org/en/latest/command_ref.html#specifying-packages),
> your specification is in the form "name" (because of the missing dash) and
> there is no package with a name matching "kernel*3.18.3*". Also in the
> second query, it is assumed that the name must match "kernel*3.18.3".
>
> TBH, I don't know whether we should extend the forms of package
> specifications to support your case. The current behaviour seems to be
> safer to me. I mean, if we improve it, user wouldn't be able to query just
> package names as easily as now.
> --
> Radek HolĂ˝
> Associate Software Engineer
> Software Management Team
> Red Hat Czech


Days ago when I tried to install/remove 7000+ packages from half-completed
downloading in Neal's way, it didn't work at all.

But without asterisk in the command, things could be harder once there are
numerous RPMs being taken.


-- 

Yours sincerely,
Christopher Meng

http://cicku.me
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20150211/51b2ecb5/attachment.html>


More information about the devel mailing list