On 11/18/2016 02:50 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On 11/18/2016 07:07 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: >> W dniu 18.11.2016 o 12:49, Michael Catanzaro pisze: >>> On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 05:37 +0000, Sérgio Basto wrote: >>>> but GNOME Software use dnf-plugin-system-upgrade ? if yes , since >>>> then >>>> we have dnf-plugin-system-upgrade should be safe offer ii >>> >>> No, GNOME Software does not use dnf and never will. >> >> I knew that packaging in Fedora is one step from madness but now I see >> that it is one step above madness... >> >> dnf, packagekit, gnome software... how many other tools try to work as >> package upgrading tools in Fedora? >> >> Or does gnome software uses packagekit? Then why PK does not use dnf? > > GNOME Software uses PackageKit and both PackageKit and DNF these days use the > same underlying dependency resolvers. So they're a lot closer than they used > to be. > > The remaining issues are basically that they don't share a history database or > local file cache, but I think that's being worked on For F26 or F27. (I'll > leave > it to Richard Hughes or Kalev Lember to confirm).
There's a plan, but I don't think anyone is currently actively working on this. I may look into this for F26, but not promising anything right now. The first part of the plan was to switch PackageKit and DNF both to use a shared libdnf library. PackageKit switched to it in F25 and DNF is now using it in rawhide/F26 as well. Next up would be to fix things up so that both PackageKit and DNF access downloaded metadata through the new shared library. -- Kalev _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
