Paolo Galtieri wrote:
> Folks,
>  a long time ago I installed a number of i686 packages on my system.  I now
> want to remove them.  When I try to remove one particular package I get some
> unexpected behavior.
> 
> I do
> 
> dnf remove pixman.i686
> 
> and I get:
> 
> Package                     Arch   Version Repository       Size
> Removing:
>  pixman                     i686   0.44.2-1.fc41 updates     711.7 KiB
> Removing dependent packages:
>  cairo                      i686   1.18.2-2.fc41 updates       1.8 MiB
>  gtk2                       i686   2.24.33-19.fc41 <unknown>    13.5 MiB
>  gtk3                       i686   3.24.43-2.fc41 <unknown>    23.4 MiB
>  libcanberra-gtk3           i686   0.30-36.fc41 <unknown>    68.8 KiB
>  libdecor                   i686   0.2.2-4.fc41 <unknown>   162.7 KiB
>  pango                      i686   1.54.0-2.fc41 <unknown>     1.0 MiB
>  wine                       x86_64 10.1-1.fc41 updates       0.0   B
> Removing unused dependencies:
>  SDL2                       i686   2.30.11-1.fc41 updates       2.0 MiB
>  SDL2_net                   x86_64 2.2.0-6.fc41 <unknown>    27.2 KiB
[...]
>  wine-wingdings-fonts       noarch 10.1-1.fc41 updates      35.1 KiB
> 
> My question is why is it removing so many x86_64 packages and why is
> pixman.i686 dependent on wine.x86_64? Is there a way to remove only the i686
> packages?

The wine x86_64 package requires both the i686 and x86_64
mesa-dri-drivers (I presume to support 32-bit windows
binaries, but I don't use Window or Wine, so that's a rough
guess).

The dependency was added in

    https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/wine/c/4787aa7

which says "pull in mesa-dri-drivers in meta package to make
direct rendering work out of the box (rhbz#827776)

You can limit the removals by not removing unused
dependencies via the --noautoremove option.  That won't
limit things to just i686, but it will leave more cruft on
your system, so I don't think it's a good option.

If you really need any of the packages which are being
removed for something else which isn't installed as an rpm,
you can either reinstall it later to use dnf mark to prevent
it from being removed as an unused dependency.

Unless you're building local software or installing non-rpm
code from elsewhere, allowing dnf to clean up what is not
used is really the more sensible option.

-- 
Todd

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

-- 
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
  • dnf behavior Paolo Galtieri
    • Re: dnf behavior Todd Zullinger

Reply via email to