dnf5 default switch and soname bump in Rawhide

[Jan Kolarik]

Hi,

Given the positive feedback on the testing side-tag
, this is
now moving into the stable along with the soname bump. Thanks for the
feedback, everyone!

Jan
--
___
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

Re: Feedback wanted: Testing side-tag for switching dnf5 in Rawhide

[Jan Kolarik]

Hi Adam,


> Just to follow up on this: the Kiwi container build test failure
> pointed to some changes that will be required to the Fedora kiwi config
> when this change lands. I have filed a PR for that -
> https://pagure.io/fedora-kiwi-descriptions/pull-request/46 - which
> should only be merged when this update is getting pushed. I tweaked the
> openQA test to make those changes on-the-fly when testing this update,
> and now it passes.
>
> By inference it occurred to me to check the osbuild configs also and I
> found a likely-required change there, so I sent a PR for that -
> https://github.com/osbuild/images/pull/637 - which has been merged. We
> would need the osbuild folks to deploy that change to prod before this
> update lands in Rawhide, otherwise some osbuild-driven image builds
> will most likely start to fail.
>

Oh, great! We were planning to handle these ourselves, so thanks a lot for
help!


> The Cockpit update test failures turned out to be just stricter
> defaults in the new dnf exposing a bug in how the openQA tests handle
> the advisory repo (the side repo that contains the packages from the
> update under testing). I fixed that, and now the tests pass.
>

Great, thanks!

Regards,
Jan

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 8:20 PM Adam Williamson 
wrote:

> On Wed, 2024-04-24 at 22:56 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2024-04-25 at 07:42 +0200, Jan Kolarik wrote:
> > > Hello everyone,
> > >
> > > We've prepared a side-tag for testing Rawhide with dnf5 as the default
> > > package manager. Instructions for installing the packages from the
> side-tag
> > > can be found at the following link [1].
> > >
> > > Please provide feedback in Bodhi or on this mailing list regarding the
> use
> > > cases you're familiar with from the existing dnf command, and share
> your
> > > experience with this new version.
> > >
> > > If there's no negative feedback regarding any critical functionality,
> we
> > > plan to push the packages from the side-tag to Rawhide next week.
> > >
> > > [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-8a41ea93a2
> >
> > The update failed a couple of openQA tests. I will take a closer look
> > into the reason in the morning, I'm busy reneedling things for the GTK
> > update at present.
>
> Just to follow up on this: the Kiwi container build test failure
> pointed to some changes that will be required to the Fedora kiwi config
> when this change lands. I have filed a PR for that -
> https://pagure.io/fedora-kiwi-descriptions/pull-request/46 - which
> should only be merged when this update is getting pushed. I tweaked the
> openQA test to make those changes on-the-fly when testing this update,
> and now it passes.
>
> By inference it occurred to me to check the osbuild configs also and I
> found a likely-required change there, so I sent a PR for that -
> https://github.com/osbuild/images/pull/637 - which has been merged. We
> would need the osbuild folks to deploy that change to prod before this
> update lands in Rawhide, otherwise some osbuild-driven image builds
> will most likely start to fail.
>
> The Cockpit update test failures turned out to be just stricter
> defaults in the new dnf exposing a bug in how the openQA tests handle
> the advisory repo (the side repo that contains the packages from the
> update under testing). I fixed that, and now the tests pass.
> --
> Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
> Fedora QA
> Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
> https://www.happyassassin.net
>
>
>
> --
> ___
> 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

Re: Feedback wanted: Testing side-tag for switching dnf5 in Rawhide

[Jan Kolarik]

Hi Kevin,

Personally, I think this is a beta requirement.
>

 IIUC the Fedora 41 Beta requirement is to successfully upgrade the system
from Fedora 40, as mentioned here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_upgrade_dnf_current_workstation.
So this still relates to the dnf4 package, which is used in Fedora 40. I
expect this will become relevant for dnf5 at the Fedora 42 Beta.

So, how do you rate the chances of having something ready by beta
> freeze?
>

Talking about "something", there's already a system-upgrade command
available in this dnf5 version from the side-tag :) However, as I mentioned
earlier, it hasn't been thoroughly tested yet; that's our goal for the
upcoming months.

Regards,
Jan

On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 7:55 PM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 11:42:57AM GMT, Jan Kolarik wrote:
> > Hello Michael,
> >
> > Does this mean that distro-upgrade from F41 to F42 is supposed to work
> > > at F41 release time (ideally at beta time)?
> > >
> >
> > Yes, the system-upgrade functionality should be available before the
> Fedora
> > 41
> > release date. We're planning extensive testing for this, including a
> Fedora
> > Testing Day.
>
> Personally, I think this is a beta requirement.
>
> Lots of people upgrade around then to get on the new release, and also
> having it available to test then is pretty important.
>
> Thats just my opinon... QE might have different opinions.
>
> > While our goal is to deliver the final system-upgrade functionality
> before
> > the stable release,
> > some adjustments may be made during the Fedora 41 lifecycle to ensure
> > smoother
> > upgrades from F41 to F42. Before executing the system-upgrade, users are
> > anyway
> > advised to ensure that all installed packages are fully updated.
>
> So, how do you rate the chances of having something ready by beta
> freeze?
>
> kevin
> --
> ___
> 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

Re: Feedback wanted: Testing side-tag for switching dnf5 in Rawhide

[Jan Kolarik]

Hi Maxwell,

This contains an update to dnf 5.2.0 which has breaking API changes. I did
> not
> see these communicated anywhere and the Change Proposal did not mention
> that
> the update would include a major version bump at the same time as the
> switch to
> dnf5 as default.
>

You're right; we missed this. I'm sorry about that. Our initial intention
wasn't to do a major version bump, but implementing the new functionality
without breaking ABI and API would have required a lot of extra work.

Would it be possible to provide a testing Copr ...
>

Sure, as mentioned earlier, there's a dnf5-testing COPR specifically for
these purposes:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf5-testing.

... and a porting guide so API users can fix their software
> before this is pushed to rawhide?
>

We'll add a section about the API changes between dnf5 versions 5.1 and
5.2, and we'll reach out to the several teams affected by this. We'll also
ensure that the builds for our reverse dependencies are passing with this
update. We definitely don't want to push this before these projects are
fixed.

Still, I hope no harm has been done yet. That's actually the purpose of
this side-tag, to identify any gaps we may have missed while working on the
switch. The 5.2.0.0 API changes aren't significant, there are though many
ABI-breaking changes.

Thanks,
Jan



On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 5:29 PM Maxwell G  wrote:

> Hi Jan,
>
> On Thu Apr 25, 2024 at 07:42 +0200, Jan Kolarik wrote:
> > We've prepared a side-tag for testing Rawhide with dnf5 as the default
> > package manager. Instructions for installing the packages from the
> side-tag
> > can be found at the following link [1].
>
> > [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-8a41ea93a2
>
> Thank you for the announcement. I appreciate the oppurtunity to test the
> update before it's pushed to rawhide.
>
> This contains an update to dnf 5.2.0 which has breaking API changes. I did
> not
> see these communicated anywhere and the Change Proposal did not mention
> that
> the update would include a major version bump at the same time as the
> switch to
> dnf5 as default. This update completely breaks fedrq due to the removed
> methods. ansible, lorax, and osbuild also depend on libdnf5. Have these
> applications had a chance to port to the new API? Would it be possible to
> provide a testing Copr and a porting guide so API users can fix their
> software
> before this is pushed to rawhide?
>
> Best,
> Maxwell
> --
> ___
> 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

Re: Feedback wanted: Testing side-tag for switching dnf5 in Rawhide

[Jan Kolarik]

Hello Michael,

Does this mean that distro-upgrade from F41 to F42 is supposed to work
> at F41 release time (ideally at beta time)?
>

Yes, the system-upgrade functionality should be available before the Fedora
41
release date. We're planning extensive testing for this, including a Fedora
Testing Day.

While our goal is to deliver the final system-upgrade functionality before
the stable release,
some adjustments may be made during the Fedora 41 lifecycle to ensure
smoother
upgrades from F41 to F42. Before executing the system-upgrade, users are
anyway
advised to ensure that all installed packages are fully updated.

Jan

On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 10:22 AM Michael J Gruber 
wrote:

> Jan Kolarik venit, vidit, dixit 2024-04-25 07:42:10:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > We've prepared a side-tag for testing Rawhide with dnf5 as the default
> > package manager. Instructions for installing the packages from the
> side-tag
> > can be found at the following link [1].
> >
> > Please provide feedback in Bodhi or on this mailing list regarding the
> use
> > cases you're familiar with from the existing dnf command, and share your
> > experience with this new version.
> >
> > If there's no negative feedback regarding any critical functionality, we
> > plan to push the packages from the side-tag to Rawhide next week.
>
> Does this mean that distro-upgrade from F41 to F42 is supposed to work
> at F41 release time (ideally at beta time)?
>
> I'm all for dnf5 and would use it now (and hat an epsisode on F39), but
> since distro-ugrades F40->F41 are off the table (as has been stated)
> it's not a good idea to use it in F40 unless you are willing to deal
> with autoremove trouble and the like.
>
> So, if we push dnf5 as default to rawhide now we have to be reasonably
> sure that F41 will distro-ugrade to F42 using dnf5.
>
> Michael
>
>
--
___
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

Re: Feedback wanted: Testing side-tag for switching dnf5 in Rawhide

[Jan Kolarik]

Hi Mattia,

Yep, there's a dnf5-testing COPR that serves exactly this purpose:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf5-testing.

Jan

On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 10:10 AM Mattia Verga via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Il 25/04/24 07:42, Jan Kolarik ha scritto:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > We've prepared a side-tag for testing Rawhide with dnf5 as the default
> > package manager. Instructions for installing the packages from the
> > side-tag can be found at the following link [1].
> >
> > Please provide feedback in Bodhi or on this mailing list regarding the
> > use cases you're familiar with from the existing dnf command, and
> > share your experience with this new version.
> >
> > If there's no negative feedback regarding any critical functionality,
> > we plan to push the packages from the side-tag to Rawhide next week.
> >
> > [1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-8a41ea93a2
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jan
>
> I'd also like to test it on a real F40 machine (I have been using mostly
> dnf5 commands in a F40 VM without issues during the latest months), is
> there maybe a COPR repo or something like which allows that?
>
> Mattia
>
> --
> ___
> 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

Feedback wanted: Testing side-tag for switching dnf5 in Rawhide

[Jan Kolarik]

Hello everyone,

We've prepared a side-tag for testing Rawhide with dnf5 as the default
package manager. Instructions for installing the packages from the side-tag
can be found at the following link [1].

Please provide feedback in Bodhi or on this mailing list regarding the use
cases you're familiar with from the existing dnf command, and share your
experience with this new version.

If there's no negative feedback regarding any critical functionality, we
plan to push the packages from the side-tag to Rawhide next week.

[1] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-8a41ea93a2

Thanks,
Jan
--
___
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

Re: F41 Change Proposal: Switch to DNF5 (system-wide)

[Jan Kolarik]

Hi guys,

the dnf-automatic command will be obsoleted.
>

Oh, sorry about that. This portion of the text was inadvertently altered
during the review process. I've already corrected the text on the wiki.

The dnf-automatic command will still be available, now provided as a plugin
and functionally compatible with dnf4. Although the configuration files'
location has changed, it will be documented in the dnf4 vs. dnf5 changes
documentation .

Thanks,
Jan

On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 12:06 AM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 11:57:48AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 14:27 -0400, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
> > > On 4/3/24 06:36, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > > > the dnf-automatic command will be obsoleted.
> > >
> > > https://dnf5.readthedocs.io/en/latest/changes.html does not say
> anything
> > > about automatic updates, and
> > >
> > > https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/dnf5/dnf5-plugin-automatic/
> > >
> > > simply suggests that dns update be executed from systemd timers or
> cron
> > > jobs.
> > >
> > >
> > > dns-automatic provided a simple interface to a setup-and-forget
> > > automatic updates; will DNF5 leave it to be set up by hand?
> > >
> > > I am asking because systemd timers have surprising behavior for
> > > suspendable systems, which leads to problems if updates are scheduled
> > > for off-hours.
> > >
> > > My experience is that even |WakeSystem=true does not make them
> reliable,
> > > but I am not sure how to debug this (because the system is suspended,
> heh).
> > >
> >
> > We do use dnf-automatic quite extensively within infra, I think. Has
> > this been discussed with infra?
>
> Not that I know of. Yes, we do use dnf-automatic all over the place. ;(
>
> kevin
> --
> ___
> 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

Re: F41 Change Proposal: Switch to DNF 5 (System-Wide)

[Jan Kolarik]

>
> Maybe the "isn't entirely removingdnf4 from the system" is the root of
> the issue. Is this planned?
>

For now, the preliminary plan is to keep the dnf4 stack in Fedora for
another one following release, meaning if dnf5 switch is implemented in
Fedora 41, dnf4 stack should be removed in Fedora 43.

Jan

On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 10:04 AM Vít Ondruch  wrote:

>
> Dne 26. 03. 24 v 8:02 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 06:39:35AM +0100, Jan Kolarik wrote:
> >> Previously, I had issues that migration from DNF4 to DNF5 left a lot of
> >>> data in /var/cache. How is this going to be addressed? I don't think
> it is
> >>> fair to leave those behind and waste disk space for regular users.
> >>>
> >> That's a good point. Though since this migration isn't entirely removing
> >> dnf4 from the system but just altering the symlink, users can still
> access
> >> it. Hence, automated removal isn't feasible. However, we could consider
> >> offering a user prompt after the transaction involving symlink
> replacement,
> >> advising users to delete /var/cache/dnf if they no longer intend to use
> >> dnf4.
> > What about adding the scriptlet to remove /var/cache/dnf to the
> > dnf4 package? (That's how I understood the original ask.)
>
>
> Maybe the "isn't entirely removingdnf4 from the system" is the root of
> the issue. Is this planned? Because in that case, the cache would be
> likely removed:
>
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dnf/blob/c7f6b4941a317bfde54b704e925152daecb17dda/f/dnf.spec#_292
>
>
> Vít
>
>
> >
> > 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
>
--
___
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

Re: F41 Change Proposal: Switch to DNF 5 (System-Wide)

[Jan Kolarik]

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 +, 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

Re: F41 Change Proposal: Switch to DNF 5 (System-Wide)

[Jan Kolarik]

Hello Vit,

I don't understand this. So if GS going to use DNF, therefore the same
> cache etc, or not? Or what other metadata PackageKit downloads on top of
> DNF?
>

Yes, it will ultimately utilize the same cache. The paragraph you
referenced is extracted from the "Early access for developmental branch
users" section. This means that until integration is finalized, GNOME
Software will use the libdnf backend, which can operate alongside dnf5 but
maintains a separate cache. I'll revise the wiki paragraph to explicitly
state this as a temporary arrangement until integration is complete.

Previously, I had issues that migration from DNF4 to DNF5 left a lot of
> data in /var/cache. How is this going to be addressed? I don't think it is
> fair to leave those behind and waste disk space for regular users.
>

That's a good point. Though since this migration isn't entirely removing
dnf4 from the system but just altering the symlink, users can still access
it. Hence, automated removal isn't feasible. However, we could consider
offering a user prompt after the transaction involving symlink replacement,
advising users to delete /var/cache/dnf if they no longer intend to use
dnf4.

Thanks,
Jan

On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 5:59 PM Vít Ondruch  wrote:

>
> Dne 25. 03. 24 v 16:46 Aoife Moloney napsal(a):
>
> === Reduced footprint ===
> The dnf5 package is a fully-featured package manager that doesn't
> require Python dependencies.
>
> It also reduces the number of software management tools in Fedora by
> replacing both the dnf and microdnf packages.
>
> The installation size of the dnf5 stack in an empty container is
> approximately 60% smaller than the dnf installation.
>
> Currently, dnf, microdnf, and PackageKit use their own cache, leading
> to significant metadata redundancy. With dnf5 and dnf5daemon, which
> share metadata, this redundancy will be eliminated.
>
>
> ... snip ...
>
>
> = [https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/issues/169
> GNOME Software support] =
> The integration of dnf5 support, particularly dnf5daemon, into GNOME
> Software is currently underway. Developers from both DNF5 and GNOME
> Software are closely connected and regularly synchronize the progress
> of their work.
>
>
> ... snip ...
>
>
> = GNOME Software =
> Rawhide users will continue to utilize the current PackageKit backend
> connected to the existing libdnf interface. These libraries can
> coexist with the new dnf5 package on the same system. Although the
> setup is not ideal due to differences in package state metadata
> formats stored at separate locations, resulting in inefficient storage
> usage, this is generally imperceptible for typical GUI users.
> Furthermore, the underlying RPM DB remains the sole shared source of
> information about installed packages.
>
>
> I don't understand this. So if GS going to use DNF, therefore the same
> cache etc, or not? Or what other metadata PackageKit downloads on top of
> DNF?
>
>
>  Before upgrade 
> 
> $ tree /usr/bin/ -P dnf*
> /usr/bin/
> ├── dnf -> dnf-3
> ├── dnf-3
> └── dnf4 -> dnf-3
> 
>
>  After upgrade 
> 
> $ tree /usr/bin/ -P dnf*
> /usr/bin/
> ├── dnf -> dnf5
> ├── dnf-3
> ├── dnf4 -> dnf-3
> └── dnf5
> 
>
>
> 
>
> Love these versions, as always
>
> 
>
>
> === Different system state ===
> The transactional history in dnf and dnf5 is not shared, and they now
> use different formats. Transactions performed in dnf will not be
> visible in dnf5, and vice versa.
>
> While the history database is not migrated to dnf5, when running a
> transaction in dnf5 for the first time, an attempt is made to convert
> and load the existing system state from dnf. This should preserve
> information about the reasons for installed packages and prevent them
> from being treated as user-installed, requiring manual removal from
> the system instead of being seen as dependencies of explicitly removed
> packages.
>
>
> Previously, I had issues that migration from DNF4 to DNF5 left a lot of
> data in /var/cache. How is this going to be addressed? I don't think it is
> fair to leave those behind and waste disk space for regular users.
>
>
> Vít
> --
> ___
> 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: 

Re: dnf-4.19.0 without filelists in Rawhide soon

[Jan Kolarik]

Yep, this is a topic for potential improvement. Currently, there's a simple
file path detection, like "arg[0] == '/' || (arg[0] == '*' && arg[1] ==
'/')", and filelists are always additionally downloaded in such cases. The
situation aligns with dnf5 at the moment, and there's already a tracking
issue for this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2263771.

Jan

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 12:09 PM Vít Ondruch  wrote:

> /usr/bin/BINARYNAME is part of the primary metadata AFAIK
>
>
> Vít
>
>
> Dne 14. 02. 24 v 10:49 Jan Kolarik napsal(a):
>
> Hi Marcin,
>
> > So no more "dnf install /usr/bin/BINARYNAME" in default setup?
>
> In the case where a file path argument is provided to dnf, it will
> automatically attempt to download the missing filelists metadata. Sorry, I
> forgot to explicitly mention this use case.
>
> Jan
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:42 AM Marcin Juszkiewicz <
> mjuszkiew...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> W dniu 9.02.2024 o 14:02, Jan Kolarik pisze:
>> > Just a heads up that a new DNF version (4.19.0) is on its way to
>> Rawhide
>> > and is expected to land within the next several hours. This update
>> > brings a system-wide change
>> > <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DNFConditionalFilelists>
>> related
>> > to not downloading filelists metadata by default.
>>
>> So no more "dnf install /usr/bin/BINARYNAME" in default setup?
>> --
>> ___
>> 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
>
> --
> ___
> 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

Re: dnf-4.19.0 without filelists in Rawhide soon

[Jan Kolarik]

Hi Marcin,

> So no more "dnf install /usr/bin/BINARYNAME" in default setup?

In the case where a file path argument is provided to dnf, it will
automatically attempt to download the missing filelists metadata. Sorry, I
forgot to explicitly mention this use case.

Jan

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:42 AM Marcin Juszkiewicz 
wrote:

> W dniu 9.02.2024 o 14:02, Jan Kolarik pisze:
> > Just a heads up that a new DNF version (4.19.0) is on its way to Rawhide
> > and is expected to land within the next several hours. This update
> > brings a system-wide change
> > <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DNFConditionalFilelists>
> related
> > to not downloading filelists metadata by default.
>
> So no more "dnf install /usr/bin/BINARYNAME" in default setup?
> --
> ___
> 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

Re: dnf-4.19.0 without filelists in Rawhide soon

[Jan Kolarik]

Hi Florian,

What's the impact on mock and older chroots?  Just use bootstrap chroot?


I don't expect any issues with existing environments. If the filelists
metadata is already present on the system, DNF simply won't load them by
default now. Or are you referring to something else?

Regards,
Jan

On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 4:29 PM Florian Weimer  wrote:

> * Jan Kolarik:
>
> > From a Fedora user perspective, there won't be any changes in the way
> > you operate the DNF package manager. The only difference is that
> > typically there will be less metadata downloaded.  Since all packages
> > in Fedora should have already eliminated file dependencies requiring
> > filelists metadata, no issues with official repositories are
> > anticipated.
>
> What's the impact on mock and older chroots?  Just use bootstrap chroot?
>
> Thanks,
> Florian
>
>
--
___
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

dnf-4.19.0 without filelists in Rawhide soon

[Jan Kolarik]

Hello everyone,

Just a heads up that a new DNF version (4.19.0) is on its way to Rawhide
and is expected to land within the next several hours. This update
brings a system-wide
change 
related to not downloading filelists metadata by default.

>From a Fedora user perspective, there won't be any changes in the way you
operate the DNF package manager. The only difference is that typically
there will be less metadata downloaded. Since all packages in Fedora should
have already eliminated file dependencies requiring filelists metadata, no
issues with official repositories are anticipated.

If you encounter any problems while resolving a transaction with a
third-party package that doesn't align with the Fedora Packaging
Guidelines, DNF will provide a hint to the user. In such cases, you can
manually fix the situation by explicitly requesting the filelists metadata
using the `--setopt=optional_metadata_types=filelists` CLI parameter.

Wishing everyone smooth and faster updates!

Best regards,
Jan
--
___
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