To distro-sync or not distro-sync?

Sérgio Basto sergio at serjux.com
Thu Oct 29 13:11:42 UTC 2015


On Qui, 2015-10-29 at 13:44 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> 
> Am 29.10.2015 um 13:37 schrieb Sérgio Basto:
> > On Qui, 2015-10-29 at 17:09 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
> >> You have a chance to get your rpmfusion softwares wiped after the sync.
> >>
> >> [1]---https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1263677
> >
> > yep, so not distro-sync
> 
> nonsense when i read the bugreport
> 
> * system-upgrade now uses dnf (standard "dnf update" approach)
> 
> THAT is the problem and i really wonder what somebody thinks by 
> implement it that way after *many years* of "yum --releasever=XX 
> distro-sync" works absolutely relieable
> 
> * change "dnf update" mode during system upgrade to
>    "dnf distro-sync --allowerasing"
> 
> THAT is the right direction but nonsense because --allowerasing is a 
> terrible idea, anyways "dnf --releasever=XX distro-sync" is not affected 
> by both wrong solutions as far as i see (expect DNF is intentionally or 
> unintenioally broken elsewhere there)

You need --allowerasing for updates which obsolete other packages, if
not you can't update.  
distro-sync can downgrading packages which in upgrading is not the best
place . You can do it after upgrade the system . 
dnf update --allowerasing  is what I want /need .

-- 
Sérgio M. B.



More information about the devel mailing list