Hi everybody,
I would like to set following packages as Orphan due to that upstream is dead
or maintainers do not respond:
repoview
rpmdepsize
snake
revisor
Best regards
Jaroslav Mracek
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel
e fixed soon. Of-course any contribution
is welcome to speed-up the process.
Jaroslav Mracek
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
There is also a bug tracker, that shold provide additional information on
switch from YUM to DNF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1156491
Jaroslav
- Original Message -
From: "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek"
To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
Sent: Tuesday, August
There is another option: ``dnf remove --duplicated``
Jaroslav
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 8:44 PM, stan wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:23:53 -0700
> stan wrote:
>
>
> > dnf remove $(dnf repoquery --installonly --latest-limit -3 -q)
>
> This is wrong! I copied the wrong line. The actual command s
Thanks for asking,
I think that we have in DNF basically two types of build factories - drpm,
and rpm. Build mechanisms (build factories) are used to download rpm or in
case of delta rpm download parts of rpm and rebuild whole rpm from
downloaded parts.
Hope that it helps
Jaroslav.
_
DNF will have soon (Pull-Request
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/pull/621) --deplist option
that should provide requested information. The new option will be available
first for rawhide in DNF-2.0 and later for Fc26. This output is similar to
```yum deplist``` command.
Jaroslav
On W
I think that the support of proposed behavior will depend mostly on libsolv
than DNF.
Jaroslav
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 8:09 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 09:54 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 9:53 A
I would like to open discussions more widely, because we are talking about
future of software distribution and discussing only particular issue is not
an approach how to delivery solid and stable architecture.
What issues I have in mind?
1. Fedora system upgrade (libgit2, axa, bat)
2. Adding new
On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 3:17 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-03-04 at 08:47 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > Dne 04. 03. 19 v 7:36 Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
> > > Why is the --setopt parameter needed? Couldn't that be based on
> > > $releasever?
> >
> > For the record - we are speaki
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:31 AM Dridi Boukelmoune <
dridi.boukelmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 11:50 PM Jan Pokorný wrote:
> >
> > On 25/04/19 09:35 +0200, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> > > Also please note that fedora-cisco-openh264.repo ships with
> > > "skip_if_unavailable=true
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:23 PM Dridi Boukelmoune <
dridi.boukelmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 10:13 AM Jaroslav Mracek
> wrote:
> >
> snip
> >> I just hope the DNF team would implement a retry on failed downloads
> >> to not consider
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:35 AM Petr Pisar wrote:
> On 2019-06-27, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DNF_Default_Best
> >
> >== Summary ==
> > Currently, DNF prefers clean dependency resolution over package
> > updates; a package (almost) silently won't get updated to
Hello everyone,
There was an announcement of release libsolv-0.7.0 ([HEADS UP] libsolv 0.7)
into rawhide, but the rebase also ended up in stable branches of Fedora 28
and 29. This release could affect not only libsolv users, but also libdnf,
PackageKit, microdnf, or dnf related applications.
I wou
The update of dnf-plugins-core and dnf-plugins-extras is ready for rawhide.
But I cannot make fedpkg build due to error:
Kerberos authentication fails: unable to obtain a session
Could not execute build: Could not login to
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/kojihub
I will ask a college to do it for me
.fc30
<https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1166293>
dnf-plugins-extras-4.0.0-1.fc30
<https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1166301>
Jaroslav
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 12:25 PM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 12:21:04PM +0100, Jaroslav M
Hello,
I have great news that the upcoming release of DNF5 will obsolete DNF in
rawhide (Fedora 39). The release is planned not before the end of May. The
change was already announced in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReplaceDnfWithDnf5.
Best regards
Jaroslav Mracek
I am really sorry but this doesn't sound like a problem of DNF or DNF5. DNF and
DNF5 uses the same solver therefore I do not expect any difference in behavior.
May I ask you to verify the behavior with DNF first?
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fe
I've rewritten the proposal to make it clear what it is about including
additional information that were unknown before. I hope that I've addressed
community suggestions and remove the confusion with original proposal. Please
feel free to comment the new proposal and discuss the new content of t
eeping the same name for a different tool is worse.
> BTW it would also help if you sketched out what is the timeline and
> process to deprecate DNF 4.x.
I have a plan to open a system wide change to remove DNF for Fedora 40.
>
>
> Vít
>
>
I am really sorry, but could we start the discussion from beginning? We use
many personal opinion but we provide very limited set of facts.
I will try to summary some facts related to the naming topic.
We developed a new software management tool to replace DNF, MICRODNF, DNF
libraries and poten
Because the naming of the tool is upstream decision I opened a discussion
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/discussions/210. DNF and the
new tool is shipped into multiple upstream therefore we have to collect
feedback from multiple distribution and upstream discussion channel is th
Dear community,
I would like to mentioned that there is last chance (about a week) to comment
the updated proposal and discussion on DNF5 github before FESCO will make a
decision.
Jaroslav
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsu
Hello Pavel,
May I ask you to be more specific what is the problem with including
references for issues? I am not sure whether your issues are related to
issues referenced by Fabio or whether you have in mind something else. It
will help us to prioritize the work.
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 10:50 AM
Hello,
> We keep the list of issues tracked here:
> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/894
> And namely, https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/issues/617
> seems like a showstopper ATM. At least as long as we have to check
> GPG signatures at koji buildroot installat
> On 7/13/23 23:59, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> +1 for postponing. We have hit issues preparing CI environment via
> ansible and applying workarounds to make dnf5 work is imho not the way
> to go with such core tool. It should be there as opt-in so it can get
> tested but not default.
The probl
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 6:40 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
>
> Except dnf5 broke a number of microdnf usecases with low memory where
> microdnf worked [1].
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2214520
Correct but as you can see the issue was not in DNF5 but in l
> On 7/17/23 07:39, Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
>
> Hi, I put more details in the fesco ticket:
> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3039#comment-864686 I believe these are
> commonly known so I did not open any ticket against dnf5.
>
> As said in the comment, I stopped putting ef
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 6:23 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
>
> Does that mean the issues with dnf [2] we able to be solved all the
> time but just weren't investigated?
The issue was investigated also with DNF, but the issue was well hidden,
because the code uses hard coded s
Thank you for the question. The next release will remove obsolete of dnf,
provide of dnf, conflict with dnf and symlink /usr/bin/dnf from DNF5 package in
rawhide. It means that if you have dnf5 installed on your system, dnf5 will
stay on your system. If you wish to install dnf package then you c
Hello,
The release is under testing. See f39-build-side-71087.
Best regards
Jaroslav
On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 4:33 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 27. 07. 23 20:03, Tom Stellard wrote:
> > * #3039 RFC: Roadmap for DNF5 in Fedora 39 / invoking the Contingency
> >Mechanism (tstellar, 17:04:33)
>
I am just curious, who is going to provide or test upgrade path for packages
originally provided by modular repositories? I am asking as DNF maintainer,
because problems with upgrades are often reported to our components.
___
devel mailing list -- devel
I believe that one of the strong complains was related to not signed packages.
The use case is that when I build RPMs locally and then I install them (see
bellow).
dnf install *.rpm --setopt=localpkg_gpgcheck=true
...
Package dnf-4.17.1-1.git.9598.552e61e.fc38.noarch.rpm is not signed
Package dn
I would like to highlight a cool feature of DNF5 - drop-in directory for
configuration overrides, where distribution may modify configuration of DNF5.
Why I am mentioning it, because it allows to make a decision by distribution
and the behavior might be modify outside of DNF5 package. Therefore
With loading or not loading file list it is not so easy or in general -
performance optimization is allways a trade one resource for another one or for
some features. DNF5 will provide a setting to not load file list, as well to
not create disk cache, or not using zchunk (already implemented in
DNF5 is completely a different component. It does not depend like microdnf on
Python. DNF plugins are not compatible with DNF5. There will be changes in
commands, options, outputs and so on therefore selling it as an update will be
quite confusing.
___
It is true, we need a cooperation with maintainers of many components, but not
everything on the list is critical for transition or proposal itself. First of
all we are not going to remove old DNF from the distribution. Then only DNF and
DNF5 directly conflict therefore there is some room for an
Such a user-case should be covered by DNF5 compatibility with DNF and maybe
there will be not a requirement for any change in your code. There are changes
in DNF5 but only when it provides a benefit and resolve some issues.
Jaroslav
___
devel mailing l
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 2:29 PM Ben Cotton
> Is there any analysis on how many yum3/dnf4 plugins exist outside of
> the core set that the DNF team maintains? I'm curious how much of a
> porting effort is required to move from yum3/dnf4 for plugin authors.
I think as an analyses can be count th
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 3:17 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> As a plugin author, I'd like something like this too...
>
>
> Porting PackageKit mostly requires some API documentation and examples
> for porting the existing DNF backend code to the new one. Some
> assistance from the DNF team might be ne
> Am 06.09.22 um 20:28 schrieb Ben Cotton:
>
> If it's still written in python, it will still be slow on devices like
> Pinephones. I was under the impression, that microdnf + libdnf was
> developed to counter this slowness?
>
> best regards,
> Marius Schwarz
No, DNF5 is not written in Python.
Correct, DNF5 will provide a library - LIBDNF5 that will provide C++ API plus
bindings to various languages including Python.
Jaroslav
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraprojec
Happy to hear that.
Jaroslav
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guideline
it is still on
our TODO list, therefore I cannot provide details right now.
Jaroslav Mracek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedora
Correct, the modular filtering is not yet implemented and this is the last
blocker for rawhide release.
Jaroslav Mracek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
python3-dnf is not going to be removed from Fedora 38 or 39. There is even not
a conflict between dnf5 and python3-dnf. Anyway we strongly recommend to start
with transition to DNF5.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe
Please can you be more specific which kind of functionality is required for
particular command? Why is it important to know what user case you want to
resolve it? Commands has multiple options and some of them could be unused.
Specially repoquery has tons of options. Knowing critical usercase wi
> Sorry for the delay in my reply here. ;(
>
> Some questions:
>
>
> no releng ticket? :(
>
> releng depends on dnf4 for a LOT of scripts.
> We will need a lot of help moving those to dnf5 I am sure.
> A porting guide for the python bindings would be welcome.
In source (header files) we h
Thank you for pointing this. Why DNF5 is not named as DNF and why we do not
plan to name it as DNF?
DNF5 is a completely new product. It replaces dnf and microdnf. DNF5 doe's the
same type of work like dnf, microdnf but behavior, internals, and plugins
differents. If we will name DNF as DNF5 we
I am sorry, DNF and DNF5 is not a Fedora packager. DNF and DNF5 is an upstream
project shipped to Fedora and other distributions including OpenSuse.
Jaroslav
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-l
> Il 12/10/22 12:28, Vít Ondruch ha scritto:
> My guess is that dnf5 is an entirely different beast than dnf. dnf was
> written in python, dnf5 is written in C (?), so it's not just a major
> version upgrade.
>
> Mattia
It is correct, DNF5 is a different product written in C++.
Jaroslav
> So, coming back to the steps needed for this to happen as discussed in the
> FESCo ticket, I
> think the first one is to decide how users can start testing dnf5 on
> "expendable" machines.
>
> The proposal says that dnf5 can be installed in parallel with dnf. I think
> this
> doesn't highlight
I believe that problems related to usage of DNF and DNF5 in parallel are
ecplained in following section -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReplaceDnfWithDnf5#Problems_related_to_using_DNF5_and_DNF_in_parallel_for_software_modification
Jaroslav
__
I agree.
The thread was created by community to ask community what should be the minimal
scope to approve the change proposal. As a DNF team lead I would be very happy
to get any input from community, because it will help us to prioritize tasks.
Jaroslav
I am sorry, `libdnf-devel` and `libdnf5-devel` conflict on file level. We had a
plan to remove the conflict, but community did not considered it as required,
therefore we drop that plan. Also the conflict we can take as a feature. The
code that would use libdnf and libdnf5 at the same time would
> Dne 17. 10. 22 v 9:28 Jaroslav Mracek napsal(a):
>
>
> So why there is proposed the `/usr/bin/dnf` symlink? To create the
> confusion again?
For Fedora 38 we cannot ship DNF binary. We also cannot provide dnf, hawkey or
libdnf in Python bindings, because the those name spa
> Are there going to be provided some deprecation warning in current
> version of DNF, should some commands or option change in DNF5? I think
> this would help prepare users for the changes in advance and possible
> make the transition smoother.
>
> Vít
>
>
>
> Dne 06. 09. 22 v 20:28 Ben Cot
> Hi
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 7:14 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
>
>
> This response really doesn't clarify what the end result is supposed to be.
> Are you planning to maintain a symlink from DNF and Yum to DNF5 after the
> transition is complete or not?
&g
> Dne 25. 10. 22 v 14:00 Jaroslav Mracek napsal(a):
>
>
> That is nice, but honestly who reads man pages? And especially who reads
> man pages of SW they are not using (assuming that the manpage will be
> part of DNF5 and not DNF).
Thank you for very much for a good point.
Recently, several users report problems with system upgrade due to rich
dependencies that are not supported by RPM in Fedora 25, and not fully
supported by RPM in Fedora 26 (statement 'with'). Rich dependencies are allowed
and supported from Fedora 26, but during the System Upgrade from Fedora 2
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 9:09 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 24. 06. 20 v 4:40 Przemek Klosowski via devel napsal(a):
> > dnf -C list extras
>
> How do I skip packages which are installed from @@commandline? Is there
> anything else than "grep -v"?
>
>
I am sorry but this is not an easy task with
It looks like that the feature made a user case with langpacks broken. See
additional reports:
Bug 2048394 - dnf should pull weak dependencies in install transaction
Bug 2033130 - exclude_from_weak_autodetect=true effectively renders rich weak
dependencies useless
Bug 2042808 - weakdeps not worki
I would like to prefer to go with for Fedora 36:
> 3. do not ignore already broken weak rich deps (partially reverts the change)
It will enable lang packs user case but provides significant part of requested
functionality.
I created PR (https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libdnf/pull/1439)
On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 5:20 PM Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > this is about the following Fedora change:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ExcludeFromWeakAutodetect
> >
> > In the tracking bugzilla, the relevant comment is:
> >
On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 1:56 PM Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
> > I am really sorry but this suggestion is incorrect. Basically we have 3
> > major misunderstandings - what is rich deps and how it is evaluated, what
On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 7:30 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 02:30:30PM +0100, Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 1:56 PM Kevin Kofler via devel <
> > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 7:42 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 11. 02. 22 13:50, Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
> > > No we didn't and it will make the feature less usable - see
> reported issues
> > > during testing in original request (
> > > https
> 2. What happens if package P (already installed on the user's system)
> starts recommending package Q (not installed on the user's system)? Will Q
> get auto-installed together with P's update, or not? I believe it's
> important to keep auto-installation enabled for *new* weak relationships.
New
Naming is really difficult topic. We would like to have the same name like
libsolv has.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedo
Correct, it will effect all dnf operations
Jaroslav
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 9:57 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 11. 10. 21 21:10, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:49 AM Kamil Paral wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 3:03 PM Miro Hrončok
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I've checked the
Yes it is correct. Supplements that are not installed during the first
install, cannot be installed anymore with enabled autodetection. There is
no way to calculate it correctly without storing all provides at the time
of installation for each package.
Jaroslav
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 8:52 AM Kam
; On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:12 AM Jaroslav Mracek
> wrote:
> >
> > Correct, it will effect all dnf operations
> >
>
> So then drop the "_on_upgrade" part? "weakexclude_unsatisfied_weakdeps"
>
>
> --
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one
t; package management in Fedora. The new microdnf has ambitions to
> > provide all major features of DNF without losing its minimal
> > footprint.
> >
> >
> > == Owner ==
> > * Name: [[User:jmracek| Jaroslav Mracek]]
> > * Email: jmra...@redhat.com
>
On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 4:30 PM Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > dnf, microdnf
>
> Doesn't the change page say the Python DNF will go away?
>
This question will be addressed in a separate change proposal. Fedora 39
can be taken as a primary ta
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 8:30 AM Gordon Messmer
wrote:
> On 4/12/22 13:54, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > == Detailed Description ==
> > The new major Microdnf will provide huge improvements and in some
> > cases better behavior then DNF. In the future, the new Microdnf will
> > replace DNF. The new Microd
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 8:48 PM Chris Snyder wrote:
> For dnf plugin writers, what will the migration path look like to switch
> over to be compatible with microdnf?
>
The new Plugins for LIBDNF5 or Microdnf will be required to use the new API
therefore it will be required to rewrite them. The D
75 matches
Mail list logo
