Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On 15. 11. 2014 at 14:51:32, Kevin Kofler wrote: Jan Silhan wrote: 3. The page says The depsolver may offer to treat the weak like very weak relations or the other way round does dnf do that? or not? DNF doesn't do that and never will. IMO that would be too hackish behavior. It's not hackish, it's configurable. Letting the user decide whether they want to have weak dependencies installed or not is part of the whole point of having them. I believe there is a misunderstanding there. It should be possible to move the bar of what's going to be selected for installation. I believe what Honza was referring to is that dnf will not support cases where it would swap the semantics of weak and very weak deps (i.e. treat Recommends as Suggests and vice versa). Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote: On 15. 11. 2014 at 14:51:32, Kevin Kofler wrote: Jan Silhan wrote: 3. The page says The depsolver may offer to treat the weak like very weak relations or the other way round does dnf do that? or not? DNF doesn't do that and never will. IMO that would be too hackish behavior. It's not hackish, it's configurable. Letting the user decide whether they want to have weak dependencies installed or not is part of the whole point of having them. I believe there is a misunderstanding there. It should be possible to move the bar of what's going to be selected for installation. I believe what Honza was referring to is that dnf will not support cases where it would swap the semantics of weak and very weak deps (i.e. treat Recommends as Suggests and vice versa). Yeah, doing both at once would be rather crazy. The quoted sentence says or, not and. Björn Persson signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
Jan Silhan wrote: 3. The page says The depsolver may offer to treat the weak like very weak relations or the other way round does dnf do that? or not? DNF doesn't do that and never will. IMO that would be too hackish behavior. It's not hackish, it's configurable. Letting the user decide whether they want to have weak dependencies installed or not is part of the whole point of having them. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
Jan Silhan jsil...@redhat.com wrote: On 10. 11. 2014 at 10:31:55, Kevin Fenzi wrote: 3. The page says The depsolver may offer to treat the weak like very weak relations or the other way round does dnf do that? or not? DNF doesn't do that and never will. IMO that would be too hackish behavior. You refuse to provide an option to pull in only required packages and not recommended ones? So if I don't want some recommended package and its dependencies in a slimmed system I should first let DNF install them and then rpm --erase them? And if there isn't room to install them even temporarily I'll have to avoid DNF and do the dependency resolution manually? Björn Persson signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Björn Persson bjorn@rombobjörn.se wrote: Jan Silhan jsil...@redhat.com wrote: On 10. 11. 2014 at 10:31:55, Kevin Fenzi wrote: 3. The page says The depsolver may offer to treat the weak like very weak relations or the other way round does dnf do that? or not? DNF doesn't do that and never will. IMO that would be too hackish behavior. You refuse to provide an option to pull in only required packages and not recommended ones? So if I don't want some recommended package and its dependencies in a slimmed system I should first let DNF install them and then rpm --erase them? And if there isn't room to install them even temporarily I'll have to avoid DNF and do the dependency resolution manually? Björn Persson -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct There are a couple of things that popped into my head about dependency resolution behavior: 1. If a package recommends/suggests a package that may exist in an optional repository, will dnf still properly resolve and install the package set (minus the the recommended/suggested packages) if the optional repository isn't active? That is, it won't throw an error and bomb out on missing dependencies? 2. How does this affect circular dependency logic that has mixed-level resolutions? For example, package A could have recommends in place for package B and suggests for package C while package B has requires for package A and package C has supplements for package A. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On Sat, 2014-11-15 at 14:51 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: It's not hackish, it's configurable. Letting the user decide whether they want to have weak dependencies installed or not is part of the whole point of having them. I agree. --no-recommends is a very basic feature of package managers in other distros that users will expect to be present in dnf. At the same time, we should be very careful with recommends so that they're used only for rare cases where the user really almost always wants the recommended package, and thus will usually not want to use --no-recommends. Debian packages, for example, overuse recommends leading to odd situations where both installing and not installing recommended packages leads to lousy results. E.g. for gnome-chess in Debian, if you install with recommends (the default in Debian and Ubuntu) you will pull in odd chess engines and Xboard, a chess GUI from the 1990s, but if you install without recommends (the default in Mint, as a reaction to bad Recommends) you get no chess engine at all and thus no computer player (and thus upstream bug reports). A GUI program Recommending (or requiring, even indirectly) another GUI program should not be acceptable in Fedora. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On 11/10/2014 06:31 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: I'd personally say people shouldn't start using this... we should be able to work up the cases or whatever... it just means that in f21 people using yum (the default) will get sometimes different behavior from dnf (not yet the default). But F21 is branched. So we are speaking about F22, where DNF should be default. I would like to have green flag from FPC for weak deps in F22. -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCE, RHCDS Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On 10. 11. 2014 at 10:31:55, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:34:16 +0100 Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote: Dnf should already have full support of this feature, at least that is the plan. Some people already tested it and so far it seems it works as expected. The semantics is described here: http://rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/Dependencies Well, if things are fully implemented then... 1. If there's a weak dep (reccomends or supplants) that generates a solving error, dnf drops that weak dep and goes on with no error? (I guess this case would be two packages recommending things that conflict or one recommending something and another package with a supplants for a different package) Weak deps has been supported in libsolv for long time but nobody tried this scenarios in dnf. AFAIK it will ends with error now - no packages installed. 2. For 'very weak' deps (suggests, enhances) does dnf show the matching packages as option to the user ? It doesn't show it but it could. 3. The page says The depsolver may offer to treat the weak like very weak relations or the other way round does dnf do that? or not? DNF doesn't do that and never will. IMO that would be too hackish behavior. Perhaps some folks would like to step up to help out with this? Make a wiki page or document of various cases people might use it, make a test copr with those cases? Draft a FPC guideline for using them? That would be really appreciated. All those can be done simultaneously with the progressing adoption. I'm convinced we should use the test run in F21 to actually know what we need to regulate/control. Writing guidelines without any prior experience with the technology in Fedora is highly unlikely to do any good (remember SCLs?). I would be glad if the packagers/users come with undefined scenarios and file BZ on DNF with: * [weak deps] summary prefix * post link to custom COPR, so we can reproduce it easily * write expected result then RPM team decides how DNF should act, change it accordingly and document this case. FYI I have added to DNF github wiki page [1] how to report different kinds of bugs. [1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/wiki/Bug-Reporting#weak-dependencies Cheers, Honza -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dne 10.11.2014 v 18:31 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): We invite anyone to start using this feature to help us sand off the rough edges. Any contribution (documentation, bug reports, patches, ...) will help us. We would just like to ask you for patience, as the state is what it is - before F22, this is more of a tech preview than production ready feature. I'd personally say people shouldn't start using this... I'd personally say that we should start to use this immediately. I'd say that wrong dependencies happens quite often in Fedora, this cannot make things worse. For example, there happens quite often that JRuby is pulled in instead of expected Ruby MRI. In this case Recommends: ruby should be more appropriate dependency then Require: ruby, because for somebody, JRuby might be preferred. But we'd like to give a hint to the resolver what is preferred by package maintainer. Vít -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUYcVkAAoJEAzgnueZF7h8dxYP/j336nQxaEkvqY4AVa6pj4ay jsrdoddwpR4+yrl7hyeP9636kJmXqq6soxO3UAl6iBZjcxzREdzV3L5tO+ZoCrrD xxwwYWN6TSNctEjQIhSnSJwEvmzsVR1O2Z3T7yVm+4jaXPEzJkRgExUJ7lv/xGTk G95vznhq/yFkOFi7PY/VXUzcARG/EAKYZBMeniPui6MuN26ndaDT/YRJYYZsN59j 03G82sFdKVQOfGl5Ksz++oZFQhzBjCZi59jvjj/zV7noLfz6aUt1CSynKyX+IFd2 jhXJJjGugyFF26vAQermr+w9o1Z0hVF/ysuu84+TMBIcglT43ePboLQrjzDYU9Ij q1X0Iie4mYKEHWACG4LSFeHzOhadh/0IBKjoHVvBHaKk6zl/CsGxzpFxyILwCSAb 5mM/xIFO+/Y0O19xOHfTHkHs4GlxitfhQZ/wllIGisMFvMMNZCO23YgbtKMbH4LE a/63XR1uGfBEPJRYstYew9chPyg2eSnsizC1On+8POZ/DxiYe4zxYoS261sq3o7i SptuBgPK/8uc2ekzV5/aJKsFe339DfeyGXbI/lqc0j99L2uNFuH51PggMzVkadnK YI5hWI+n2yrpqgTnQhpgVxjdXxbHrVqSYk3Rr4jKhM+qCrVTj7+8rn/p2g0wx16V ClZfCmOct143cyWJHZfg =0Jow -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
Dne 11.11.2014 v 09:14 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): Dne 10.11.2014 v 18:31 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): We invite anyone to start using this feature to help us sand off the rough edges. Any contribution (documentation, bug reports, patches, ...) will help us. We would just like to ask you for patience, as the state is what it is - before F22, this is more of a tech preview than production ready feature. I'd personally say people shouldn't start using this... I'd personally say that we should start to use this immediately. I'd say that wrong dependencies happens quite often in Fedora, this cannot make things worse. For example, there happens quite often that JRuby is pulled in instead of expected Ruby MRI. In this case Recommends: ruby should be more appropriate dependency then Require: ruby, because for somebody, JRuby might be preferred. But we'd like to give a hint to the resolver what is preferred by package maintainer. Vít Additionally, if DNF can properly use soft dependencies while YUM cannot, it will help us to drive user adoption of DNF, which is also good thing IMO. Vít -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On 10. 11. 2014 at 10:31:55, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:34:16 +0100 Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote: Dnf should already have full support of this feature, at least that is the plan. Some people already tested it and so far it seems it works as expected. The semantics is described here: http://rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/Dependencies Well, if things are fully implemented then... 1. If there's a weak dep (reccomends or supplants) that generates a solving error, dnf drops that weak dep and goes on with no error? (I guess this case would be two packages recommending things that conflict or one recommending something and another package with a supplants for a different package) 2. For 'very weak' deps (suggests, enhances) does dnf show the matching packages as option to the user ? 3. The page says The depsolver may offer to treat the weak like very weak relations or the other way round does dnf do that? or not? I will defer these three to Jan (CCed) to answer However, as people already pointed out, there are no guidelines how to use this feature and we don't have this fully tested (kind of chicken-egg problem, we can't fully test it unless it's used in Fedora). Well, you could test with copr? Or a side repo? It should be pretty easy to create a repo with packages showing all the cases? Some testing was already done, not on a large scale though. That was my original point. We invite anyone to start using this feature to help us sand off the rough edges. Any contribution (documentation, bug reports, patches, ...) will help us. We would just like to ask you for patience, as the state is what it is - before F22, this is more of a tech preview than production ready feature. I'd personally say people shouldn't start using this... we should be able to work up the cases or whatever... it just means that in f21 people using yum (the default) will get sometimes different behavior from dnf (not yet the default). I would like to emphasize that using this in Fedora will not do any damage, yum will continue to work exactly the same way it always has been working. Also, people using dnf already do experience different behavior than that of yum from time to time due to different dependency solvers so I don't see how this would be any different. Perhaps some folks would like to step up to help out with this? Make a wiki page or document of various cases people might use it, make a test copr with those cases? Draft a FPC guideline for using them? That would be really appreciated. All those can be done simultaneously with the progressing adoption. I'm convinced we should use the test run in F21 to actually know what we need to regulate/control. Writing guidelines without any prior experience with the technology in Fedora is highly unlikely to do any good (remember SCLs?). Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
- Original Message - From: Michael Schroeder m...@suse.de To: Development discussions related to Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Sunday, November 9, 2014 4:03:37 PM Subject: Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+ On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 11:26:50PM +0100, drago01 wrote: Well if you have package foo that suggests bar and you do dnf/yum install foo it should simply install both, but if you do yum/dnf remove bar it should leave foo installed. But neither is implemented. Because you're using Suggests, not Recommends. For Recommends, dnf will also install bar if you install foo. It will also remove bar again if you deinstall foo and clean_requirements_on_remove is set to true. Well, I suppose that it's what libsolv (that is used by DNF) will do. But the behavior is not documented in the DNF's documentation which implies that we cannot promise publicly how will DNF behave in such unsupported cases. And I believe that DNF cannot support these tags unless there is an official Fedora document/guideline that specifies the exact semantics. However, I'll be happy if it turns out that I'm wrong. -- Radek Holý Associate Software Engineer Software Management Team Red Hat Czech -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 09:54:35PM +0400, Peter Lemenkov wrote: Hello All! RPM shipped with Fedora 21+ has support for weak dependencies. What's the current status of that feature? Is it ok to start using them (building RPM with Recommends/Suggests tags)? I don't think it is ok to start using them for now. We don't have any packaging guidelines on their usage. I have a real-world example where I'd like to mark a dependency as Suggests instead of Requires and want to know if dnf is ready to process it? I played with Recommends in one case and it actually worked as expected. Even package uninstalls and updates honored the dependency semantics as expected. However I think it is because libsolv's logic and not some explicit handling in dnf. Michal -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On 8. 11. 2014 at 16:49:18, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 21:54:35 +0400 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com wrote: Hello All! RPM shipped with Fedora 21+ has support for weak dependencies. What's the current status of that feature? Is it ok to start using them (building RPM with Recommends/Suggests tags)? My understanding: rpm - accepts them as valid and lets you build packages with them. yum - ignores them completely createrepo - adds the info to the metadata dnf via hawkey - will only use them to break ties if for example two packages are both possible solutions, but one also is suggests or whatever. I have a real-world example where I'd like to mark a dependency as Suggests instead of Requires and want to know if dnf is ready to process it? not really as far as I know. dnf needs to handle these cases, it needs documented, etc. Dnf should already have full support of this feature, at least that is the plan. Some people already tested it and so far it seems it works as expected. The semantics is described here: http://rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/Dependencies However, as people already pointed out, there are no guidelines how to use this feature and we don't have this fully tested (kind of chicken-egg problem, we can't fully test it unless it's used in Fedora). We invite anyone to start using this feature to help us sand off the rough edges. Any contribution (documentation, bug reports, patches, ...) will help us. We would just like to ask you for patience, as the state is what it is - before F22, this is more of a tech preview than production ready feature. Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On 10. 11. 2014 at 10:04:53, Michal Sekletar wrote: On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 09:54:35PM +0400, Peter Lemenkov wrote: Hello All! RPM shipped with Fedora 21+ has support for weak dependencies. What's the current status of that feature? Is it ok to start using them (building RPM with Recommends/Suggests tags)? I don't think it is ok to start using them for now. We don't have any packaging guidelines on their usage. On the other hand, writing down guidelines without any prior experience might do more damage than good, that's why I would like Fedora maintainers to give this a shot. We plan to gather some feedback on the Developer Conference [1] to tune up the guidelines. However, what I'm not sure about is whether it's already possible to build weak-deps enhanced rpms in Fedora, has someone tested that? I've heard it's possible in COPR but I'm not sure about koji. I have a real-world example where I'd like to mark a dependency as Suggests instead of Requires and want to know if dnf is ready to process it? I played with Recommends in one case and it actually worked as expected. Even package uninstalls and updates honored the dependency semantics as expected. However I think it is because libsolv's logic and not some explicit handling in dnf. Yeah, that's the sweet part. There needs to be some level of support in the layers above but ultimately libsolv is the key part when it comes to weak deps. [1] http://devconf.cz/ Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:45:05AM +0100, Jan Zelený wrote: snip However, what I'm not sure about is whether it's already possible to build weak-deps enhanced rpms in Fedora, has someone tested that? I've heard it's possible in COPR but I'm not sure about koji. I tested this and building weak-deps enhanced package in Koji worked for me as expected, maybe by pure luck though. Michal I have a real-world example where I'd like to mark a dependency as Suggests instead of Requires and want to know if dnf is ready to process it? I played with Recommends in one case and it actually worked as expected. Even package uninstalls and updates honored the dependency semantics as expected. However I think it is because libsolv's logic and not some explicit handling in dnf. Yeah, that's the sweet part. There needs to be some level of support in the layers above but ultimately libsolv is the key part when it comes to weak deps. [1] http://devconf.cz/ Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On 10. 11. 2014 at 13:16:58, Michal Sekletar wrote: On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:45:05AM +0100, Jan Zelený wrote: snip However, what I'm not sure about is whether it's already possible to build weak-deps enhanced rpms in Fedora, has someone tested that? I've heard it's possible in COPR but I'm not sure about koji. I tested this and building weak-deps enhanced package in Koji worked for me as expected, maybe by pure luck though. Well, it should have been possible, but that was just a theory. Your experiment seems to have validated that theory :-) Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 13:46:54 +0100 Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote: On 10. 11. 2014 at 13:16:58, Michal Sekletar wrote: On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:45:05AM +0100, Jan Zelený wrote: snip However, what I'm not sure about is whether it's already possible to build weak-deps enhanced rpms in Fedora, has someone tested that? I've heard it's possible in COPR but I'm not sure about koji. I tested this and building weak-deps enhanced package in Koji worked for me as expected, maybe by pure luck though. Well, it should have been possible, but that was just a theory. Your experiment seems to have validated that theory :-) Builds with these tags should work fine in f21 and rawhide currently. kevin pgp0HMfwbnoAw.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:34:16 +0100 Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote: Dnf should already have full support of this feature, at least that is the plan. Some people already tested it and so far it seems it works as expected. The semantics is described here: http://rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/Dependencies Well, if things are fully implemented then... 1. If there's a weak dep (reccomends or supplants) that generates a solving error, dnf drops that weak dep and goes on with no error? (I guess this case would be two packages recommending things that conflict or one recommending something and another package with a supplants for a different package) 2. For 'very weak' deps (suggests, enhances) does dnf show the matching packages as option to the user ? 3. The page says The depsolver may offer to treat the weak like very weak relations or the other way round does dnf do that? or not? However, as people already pointed out, there are no guidelines how to use this feature and we don't have this fully tested (kind of chicken-egg problem, we can't fully test it unless it's used in Fedora). Well, you could test with copr? Or a side repo? It should be pretty easy to create a repo with packages showing all the cases? We invite anyone to start using this feature to help us sand off the rough edges. Any contribution (documentation, bug reports, patches, ...) will help us. We would just like to ask you for patience, as the state is what it is - before F22, this is more of a tech preview than production ready feature. I'd personally say people shouldn't start using this... we should be able to work up the cases or whatever... it just means that in f21 people using yum (the default) will get sometimes different behavior from dnf (not yet the default). Perhaps some folks would like to step up to help out with this? Make a wiki page or document of various cases people might use it, make a test copr with those cases? Draft a FPC guideline for using them? kevin pgppYc2T7CjYe.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 11:26:50PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
Well if you have package foo that suggests bar and you do
dnf/yum install foo it should simply install both, but if you do
yum/dnf remove bar it should leave foo installed.
But neither is implemented.
Because you're using Suggests, not Recommends. For Recommends, dnf will
also install bar if you install foo. It will also remove bar again if
you deinstall foo and clean_requirements_on_remove is set to true.
Cheers,
Michael.
--
Michael Schroeder m...@suse.de
SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
Hello All! RPM shipped with Fedora 21+ has support for weak dependencies. What's the current status of that feature? Is it ok to start using them (building RPM with Recommends/Suggests tags)? I have a real-world example where I'd like to mark a dependency as Suggests instead of Requires and want to know if dnf is ready to process it? -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On 8 November 2014 10:54, Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com wrote: Hello All! RPM shipped with Fedora 21+ has support for weak dependencies. What's the current status of that feature? Is it ok to start using them (building RPM with Recommends/Suggests tags)? I have a real-world example where I'd like to mark a dependency as Suggests instead of Requires and want to know if dnf is ready to process it? -- I am guessing the question is Has dnf grown a method for dealing with Suggests and how does it deal with it? Does it ask if you want to install something that wasn't required.. does it treat a Suggests like it is a Required and just installs it or does it ignore it unless some extra flag is add (--read-my-mind) -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 10:47 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 November 2014 10:54, Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com wrote: Hello All! RPM shipped with Fedora 21+ has support for weak dependencies. What's the current status of that feature? Is it ok to start using them (building RPM with Recommends/Suggests tags)? I have a real-world example where I'd like to mark a dependency as Suggests instead of Requires and want to know if dnf is ready to process it? -- I am guessing the question is Has dnf grown a method for dealing with Suggests and how does it deal with it? Does it ask if you want to install something that wasn't required.. does it treat a Suggests like it is a Required and just installs it or does it ignore it unless some extra flag is add (--read-my-mind) Well if you have package foo that suggests bar and you do dnf/yum install foo it should simply install both, but if you do yum/dnf remove bar it should leave foo installed. But neither is implemented. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Status of weak dependencies support in Fedora 21+
On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 21:54:35 +0400 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com wrote: Hello All! RPM shipped with Fedora 21+ has support for weak dependencies. What's the current status of that feature? Is it ok to start using them (building RPM with Recommends/Suggests tags)? My understanding: rpm - accepts them as valid and lets you build packages with them. yum - ignores them completely createrepo - adds the info to the metadata dnf via hawkey - will only use them to break ties if for example two packages are both possible solutions, but one also is suggests or whatever. I have a real-world example where I'd like to mark a dependency as Suggests instead of Requires and want to know if dnf is ready to process it? not really as far as I know. dnf needs to handle these cases, it needs documented, etc. kevin pgpSsgkvbLGgD.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
