Hi Zbyszek, Thanks for feedback.
Second, I think that the lack of support for dnf5 in some areas is > going to be painful: in particular, as long as Anaconda and PackageKit > depend on dnf-3, we're going to be in a strange state the basic system > tools use two different versions of the code, and perhaps more > importantly, use two different databases of information about > installed packages. > I'd like to emphasize that the RPM DB, which contains the database of installed packages, remains the singular source in the system. However, the metadata containing the reasons for package installations now reside in a different format and location. Therefore, when concurrently using dnf4 and dnf5 on the system, packages installed by one of them as dependencies will appear as user-installed to the other one, potentially leading to them not being auto-removed later. Regards, Jan On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 7:11 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:46:47PM +0000, Aoife Moloney wrote: > > == Summary == > > Change the default package manager from dnf to dnf5. > > > > == Owner == > > * Name: [[User:jkolarik| Jan Kolarik]] > > * Email: jkola...@redhat.com > > > > * Name: [[User:jmracek| Jaroslav Mracek]] > > * Email: jmra...@redhat.com > > First, thank you for putting together such a detailed proposal. > Having all the dependencies listed allows a proper evaluation of how > things are going to work during the upgrade. > > Second, I think that the lack of support for dnf5 in some areas is > going to be painful: in particular, as long as Anaconda and PackageKit > depend on dnf-3, we're going to be in a strange state the basic system > tools use two different versions of the code, and perhaps more > importantly, use two different databases of information about > installed packages. > > But, third, I think we should do the switch. Dnf5 is some aspects > significantly better than dnf-3, so users will really benefit from > the switch. And we cannot and should not maintain the situation where > the dnf team is working on two different versions of the code. We > need to switch to the new thing and devote the resources we have > to making it work great. > > Zbyszek > -- > _______________________________________________ > 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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue >
-- _______________________________________________ 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 Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
