On 20.06.2014 14:11, Reindl Harald wrote:
> 
> Am 20.06.2014 14:04, schrieb Tim Lauridsen:
>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Dennis Gilmore <den...@ausil.us 
>> <mailto:den...@ausil.us>> wrote:
>>
>>     In testing dnf on rawhide I nearly always do "dnf clean metadata && dnf 
>> update" purely because I found most of
>>     the time dnfs metadata was out of date. To me dnf fetching the metadata 
>> behind the scenes just doesn't work
>>     right. But I'm not sure that me or rawhide fits into the experience dnf 
>> is trying to give.
>>
>>     Dennis
>>
>>
>> Dnf-0.5.2 has a --refresh option, there will a check if the repo metadata is 
>> newer than the cached one.
>>
>> so.
>>
>> dnf update --refresh will check and update metadata if needed
> 
> *that* would be a useful default instead background-refreshes
> 

I think these are two separate issues. Independent of the background
refreshes dnf should always check if its current view of the world is
up-to-date (that is the data in its cache is current).
This can be fairly important when it comes to security issues. When a
fatal exploit is fixed in a package you don't want dnf to say that there
are not updates available when this is in fact not true.

Regards,
  Dennis
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Reply via email to