On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 20:32:46 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > I've read the rest of the thread, but note that "rpm -qa" based queries
> > piped
> > to "xargs rpm -e" still work fine for a package removal task like this
>
> that may be true but you hardly can sell DNF as improvement if you need
>
Il 29/06/2015 20:32, Reindl Harald ha scritto:
>
> that may be true but you hardly can sell DNF as improvement if you
> need such workarounds while YUM worked perfectly for many years while
> working around the package manager in general should be avoided
> because no longs, no dependency solving a
On 29 June 2015 at 20:32, Reindl Harald wrote:
> given that the dnf autocompletion is also horrible slow comapared with YUM i
> see still no advantages from the change, try "yum cl" versus "dnf
> cl", in case of DNF it feels like a network request
>
I'd noticed that some time ago too, the easie
Am 29.06.2015 um 20:19 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 12:12:57 +0200, Germano Massullo wrote:
What is wrong with DNF's regular expression
# dnf remove *debuginfo*.fc20.x86_64
? I am on F22 but I have a lot packets that should match that regular
expression, but dnf does not find
On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 12:12:57 +0200, Germano Massullo wrote:
> What is wrong with DNF's regular expression
> # dnf remove *debuginfo*.fc20.x86_64
> ? I am on F22 but I have a lot packets that should match that regular
> expression, but dnf does not find them.
> I also tried to add some escape chars
Il 29/06/2015 17:05, David Howells ha scritto:
> Germano Massullo wrote:
>
>> What is wrong with DNF's regular expression
>> # dnf remove *debuginfo*.fc20.x86_64
> Do you mean 'regular expression' or did you mean 'glob'?
>
> If you did mean 'regular expression', then did you want:
>
> dnf re
Germano Massullo wrote:
> What is wrong with DNF's regular expression
> # dnf remove *debuginfo*.fc20.x86_64
Do you mean 'regular expression' or did you mean 'glob'?
If you did mean 'regular expression', then did you want:
dnf remove .*debuginfo.*[.]fc20[.]x86_64
David
--
devel maili
Il 29/06/2015 16:28, Jan Zelený ha scritto:
> However, there is a bug[2] open for this. If you provide your use case
> there, it will help prioritizing the bug. [2]
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1199432
Thank you, I will provide my use case
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedora
On 29. 6. 2015 at 12:21:30, Petr Stodulka wrote:
> On 29.6.2015 12:12, Germano Massullo wrote:
> > What is wrong with DNF's regular expression
> > # dnf remove *debuginfo*.fc20.x86_64
> > ? I am on F22 but I have a lot packets that should match that regular
> > expression, but dnf does not find the
>dnf remove '*debuginfo*'.fc20.x86_64
>dnf remove '*debuginfo*.fc20.x86_64'
both mean exactly the same thing, of course.
Reindl you need to revise sh quoting rules (which are admittedly odd,
but this is a simple case).
Toby.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.
Il 29/06/2015 12:25, Reindl Harald ha scritto:
>
> dnf remove '*debuginfo*.fc20.x86_64'
> anyways, it's a terrible regression compared to yum
Same result
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedora
Am 29.06.2015 um 12:22 schrieb Germano Massullo:
Il 29/06/2015 12:18, Ondrej Oprala ha scritto:
I think dnf only supports globbing in this case ... try dnf remove
'*debuginfo*' to protect the *-s from being expanded by the shell
# dnf remove '*debuginfo*'
will remove all packages, I need only
Il 29/06/2015 12:18, Ondrej Oprala ha scritto:
> I think dnf only supports globbing in this case ... try dnf remove
> '*debuginfo*' to protect the *-s from being expanded by the shell
# dnf remove '*debuginfo*'
will remove all packages, I need only to remove fc20 debuginfo packages.
# dnf remove '
On 29.6.2015 12:12, Germano Massullo wrote:
What is wrong with DNF's regular expression
# dnf remove *debuginfo*.fc20.x86_64
? I am on F22 but I have a lot packets that should match that regular
expression, but dnf does not find them.
I also tried to add some escape chars like
dnf remove *\-debug
On 29.06.2015 12:12, Germano Massullo wrote:
What is wrong with DNF's regular expression
# dnf remove *debuginfo*.fc20.x86_64
? I am on F22 but I have a lot packets that should match that regular
expression, but dnf does not find them.
I also tried to add some escape chars like
dnf remove *\-de
What is wrong with DNF's regular expression
# dnf remove *debuginfo*.fc20.x86_64
? I am on F22 but I have a lot packets that should match that regular
expression, but dnf does not find them.
I also tried to add some escape chars like
dnf remove *\-debuginfo\-*.fc20.x86_64
but the result is the same
16 matches
Mail list logo
