Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Dne 21. 12. 22 v 18:45 Chuck Anderson napsal(a): On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 01:32:10PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: On Wednesday, 21 December 2022 at 12:31, Vít Ondruch wrote: [...] Let me put together a few points to sum this up: 1) DNF name is well established, keep the DNF

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 01:32:10PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Wednesday, 21 December 2022 at 12:31, Vít Ondruch wrote: > [...] > > Let me put together a few points to sum this up: > > > > 1) DNF name is well established, keep the DNF name (and forget about YUM). > > > > 2)

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wednesday, 21 December 2022 at 12:31, Vít Ondruch wrote: [...] > Let me put together a few points to sum this up: > > 1) DNF name is well established, keep the DNF name (and forget about YUM). > > 2) Keep the compatibility on reasonable level. 100% compatibility is myth > (even between the

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Dne 21. 12. 22 v 11:40 Jaroslav Mracek napsal(a): 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> On 19 Dec 2022, at 16:50, Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > > I also remember RHEL8 where we ship DNF as YUM. And DNF is very similar to > YUM - both are Python based tool. Anyway in RHEL9 the same tool is shipped as > DNF, because it creates a confusion. And I don't want to experience the same >

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 2:16 PM Vít Ondruch wrote: > Good to know. Thx. Please tell me that part of the plan is renaming dnf5 > => dnf and I'll shut up. > I second to this. While it makes sense to temporarily introduce a parallel installable dnf5 to enable easier early testing, I think dnf5

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Dne 19. 12. 22 v 17:50 Jaroslav Mracek napsal(a): I am still very much against the `dnf5` package name and I have uneasy feelings reading (in my words) "`/usr/bin/dnf` symlink will change from `/usr/bin/dnf-3` to `/usr/bin/dnf5`". This name change is going to break so basic assumption such as

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> I am still very much against the `dnf5` package name and I have uneasy > feelings reading (in my words) "`/usr/bin/dnf` symlink will change from > `/usr/bin/dnf-3` to `/usr/bin/dnf5`". This name change is going to break > so basic assumption such as `rpm -q dnf`. It won't really work even

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

I am still very much against the `dnf5` package name and I have uneasy feelings reading (in my words) "`/usr/bin/dnf` symlink will change from `/usr/bin/dnf-3` to `/usr/bin/dnf5`". This name change is going to break so basic assumption such as `rpm -q dnf`. It won't really work even when `rpm

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Thx for heads up. I assume this is the diff: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes%2FReplaceDnfWithDnf5=revision=663558=655776 Vít Dne 16. 12. 22 v 12:11 Jaroslav Mracek napsal(a): I've rewritten the proposal to make it clear what it is about including additional information

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wednesday, 23 November 2022 at 11:38, Jaroslav Mracek wrote: [...] > > I understand that deprecation warning has their own issues, but if you > > already put some thoughts into that topic, I'd like you to elaborate > > more then just provide statements like above. > > DNF in early versions

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> 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. We already played

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Dne 25. 10. 22 v 14:00 Jaroslav Mracek napsal(a): 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> 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? > > Rahul Yes, we have a plan to

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Hi On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 7:14 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > > DNF team has experience with replacing of YUM in Fedora and RHEL. It give > us an advantage to not repeat the same mistakes. We already know that > shipping DNF as YUM was not a good idea. > This response really doesn't clarify what

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> 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 spaces are already

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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 Cotton napsal(a):

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Monday, 17 October 2022 08.28.11 WEST Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > 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. That is where the irony is, it is a new product but you still keep the moniker DNF in the name

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 17-10-2022 09:28, Jaroslav Mracek wrote: * Naming unification of DNF5 stack - it will be quite strange to name something dnf that cannot provide dnf and so on. So RUM it is then: Re-invented Update Manager. Re-invented like the wheel and should suit all consuming parties. :)

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Dne 17. 10. 22 v 9:28 Jaroslav Mracek napsal(a): 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 10:36:52AM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 10/12/22 17:47, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 at 10:32, Kevin P. Fleming > > wrote: > > > > On 10/12/22 08:59, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > > Maybe call it the

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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 what things

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Heh, I would really prefer to stay with "dnf", but thx everybody for brainstorming the name. I like the proposals ;) Vít Dne 12. 10. 22 v 15:59 Stephen Smoogen napsal(a): On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 at 09:49, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Dne 12. 10. 22 v 12:28 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > So since

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Dne 12. 10. 22 v 15:48 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a): Dne 12. 10. 22 v 12:28 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): So since I don't think the DNF5 name and especially the package name was elaborated here and my wish in package review to have the package name just `dnf` was completely ignored [1], I'll ask here.

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 10/12/22 17:47, Stephen Smoogen wrote: On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 at 10:32, Kevin P. Fleming > wrote: On 10/12/22 08:59, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > Maybe call it the Fedora Update Manager 'FUM' ? Unless we're going to call it RUM when it makes its way

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 12-10-2022 17:19, Neal Gompa wrote: On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 11:15 AM Alexander Sosedkin wrote: On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 4:47 PM Stephen Smoogen wrote: On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 at 10:32, Kevin P. Fleming wrote: On 10/12/22 08:59, Stephen Smoogen wrote: Maybe call it the Fedora Update Manager

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Dne 12. 10. 22 v 17:02 Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a): 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. It is different beast for developers and author of plugins. Otherwise 1) it has

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 10:47:07AM -0400, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 at 10:32, Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > > > On 10/12/22 08:59, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > > Maybe call it the Fedora Update Manager 'FUM' ? > > > > Unless we're going to call it RUM when it makes its way into

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Constantly changing the name/command of the package manager seems like a huge annoyance to end users at best, and a point of discouragement at worst. Think about all the guides that can be found via search engines for how to do things in a given OS. If we're constantly changing the package

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 11:15 AM Alexander Sosedkin wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 4:47 PM Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 at 10:32, Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > >> On 10/12/22 08:59, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > >> > Maybe call it the Fedora Update Manager 'FUM' ? > >> > >> Unless

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 4:47 PM Stephen Smoogen wrote: > On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 at 10:32, Kevin P. Fleming wrote: >> On 10/12/22 08:59, Stephen Smoogen wrote: >> > Maybe call it the Fedora Update Manager 'FUM' ? >> >> Unless we're going to call it RUM when it makes its way into RHEL, that >> name

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Il 12/10/22 12:28, Vít Ondruch ha scritto: > So since I don't think the DNF5 name and especially the package name was > elaborated here and my wish in package review to have the package name > just `dnf` was completely ignored [1], I'll ask here. > > Why `dnf5` and not `dnf` version 5. If it is

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 10:31 AM Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > > On 10/12/22 08:59, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > Maybe call it the Fedora Update Manager 'FUM' ? > > Unless we're going to call it RUM when it makes its way into RHEL, that > name may not be the best choice :-) > Let's not forget all the

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 at 10:32, Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > On 10/12/22 08:59, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > Maybe call it the Fedora Update Manager 'FUM' ? > > Unless we're going to call it RUM when it makes its way into RHEL, that > name may not be the best choice :-) > > Well Red Hat shipped the

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 10/12/22 08:59, Stephen Smoogen wrote: Maybe call it the Fedora Update Manager 'FUM' ? Unless we're going to call it RUM when it makes its way into RHEL, that name may not be the best choice :-) -- Kevin P. Fleming He/Him/His Principal Program Manager, RHEL Red Hat US/Eastern Time Zone

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 at 09:49, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 12. 10. 22 v 12:28 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > > So since I don't think the DNF5 name and especially the package name was > elaborated here and my wish in package review > > to have the package name just `dnf` was completely ignored [1],

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Dne 12. 10. 22 v 12:28 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): So since I don't think the DNF5 name and especially the package name was elaborated here and my wish in package review to have the package name just `dnf` was completely ignored [1], I'll ask here. Why `dnf5` and not `dnf` version 5. If it is not

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

So since I don't think the DNF5 name and especially the package name was elaborated here and my wish in package review to have the package name just `dnf` was completely ignored [1], I'll ask here. Why `dnf5` and not `dnf` version 5. If it is not DNF and it needs different name, then please

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 08:01:45PM -0500, Maxwell G via devel wrote: > On Tue Sep 6, 2022, Ben Cotton wrote: > > == Upgrade/compatibility impact == > > The new DNF5 will obsolete `dnf`, `yum`, `dnf-automatic`, `yum-utils`, > > and DNF plugins (core and extras). python3-dnf and LIBDNF (`libdnf`, >

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Sat Sep 24, 2022, Maxwell G wrote: > On Tue Sep 6, 2022, Ben Cotton wrote: > > == Upgrade/compatibility impact == > > The new DNF5 will obsolete `dnf`, `yum`, `dnf-automatic`, `yum-utils`, > > and DNF plugins (core and extras). python3-dnf and LIBDNF (`libdnf`, > > `python3-hawkey`) will be

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Sorry for the delay in my reply here. ;( Some questions: > * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issues #Releng issue number] 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue Sep 6, 2022, Ben Cotton wrote: > == Upgrade/compatibility impact == > The new DNF5 will obsolete `dnf`, `yum`, `dnf-automatic`, `yum-utils`, > and DNF plugins (core and extras). python3-dnf and LIBDNF (`libdnf`, > `python3-hawkey`) will be obsoleted by `fedora-obsolete-packages`. I am

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Ben Cotton kirjoitti 6.9.2022 klo 21.28: > > > These two are the only mentions of dnf-automatic in this change. What > does "replace" mean here? How does DNF5 cover dnf-automatic's use case? This is a good question. We will replace the functionality, but it is still on our TODO list,

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Am 20.09.22 um 22:53 schrieb Tommy Nguyen: DNF5 is ridiculously fast. The new text output using the C++ fmt library is also a bonus. Yes, it's fast, which is a great improvement \o/ The new output format is ... debateable. It has advantages with "screen -x"-sessions with different

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 21-09-2022 09:33, Sandro wrote: As of recent, memory usage might be of a larger concern. Of which your data shows a very welcome 40% reduction. I'll gladly take the speed improvement as a bonus. I wrote that before morning coffee. It's a 60% reduction. DNF5 is using only 40% of what DNF

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 21-09-2022 03:11, Tommy Nguyen wrote: On Wed, 2022-09-21 at 02:53 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: Tommy Nguyen wrote: DNF5 is ridiculously fast. It is faster, but "ridiculously"? In the metric that matters (elapsed wallclock time), your benchmark shows the update taking 30% less

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wed, 2022-09-21 at 02:53 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Tommy Nguyen wrote: > > DNF5 is ridiculously fast. > > It is faster, but "ridiculously"? In the metric that matters (elapsed > wallclock time), your benchmark shows the update taking 30% less > time. > > That said, there are

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Tommy Nguyen wrote: > DNF5 is ridiculously fast. It is faster, but "ridiculously"? In the metric that matters (elapsed wallclock time), your benchmark shows the update taking 30% less time. That said, there are other features of DNF5 (no more Python, shared cache between PackageKit and CLI)

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

For those who are still not convinced, here is a comparison: $ toolbox create -d fedora -r 37 && toolbox enter $ sudo time dnf upgrade -y 26.79user 3.46system 0:49.09elapsed 61%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 489304maxresident)k 47400inputs+1243320outputs (266major+377843minor)pagefaults 0swaps $ toolbox

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Ben Cotton kirjoitti 6.9.2022 klo 21.28: == Summary == Make DNF5 the new default packaging tool. The change will replace DNF, LIBDNF, and DNF-AUTOMATIC with the new DNF5 and new Libdnf5 library. == Upgrade/compatibility impact == The new DNF5 will obsolete `dnf`, `yum`, `dnf-automatic`,

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

+1 on this, I was wondering if there are any plans to include rpm-ostree in this effort? rpm-ostree today uses libdnf and since fedora silverblue & fedora coreos are managed by rpm-ostree it would be nice to have an unified plan/coordination for this change. Furthermore, it would also be nice if

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Sep 8, 2022 8:45:19 AM Maxwell G via devel : On Thursday, September 8, 2022 Jaroslav Mracek wrote: First of all we are not going to remove old DNF from the distribution. Isn't that what The new DNF5 will obsolete `dnf`, `yum`, `dnf-automatic`, `yum-utils`, and DNF plugins (core and

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thursday, September 8, 2022 Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > First of all we are not going to remove old DNF from the distribution. Isn't that what > The new DNF5 will obsolete `dnf`, `yum`, `dnf-automatic`, `yum-utils`, > and DNF plugins (core and extras). python3-dnf and LIBDNF (`libdnf`, >

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, 2022-09-08 at 08:39 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > installing parallel versions of the same development tools Hi, Jaroslav said they are not the same, hence I asked. Bye, Milan ___ devel mailing list --

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 8:27 AM Milan Crha wrote: > > On Thu, 2022-09-08 at 12:20 +0200, Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > > 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,

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, 2022-09-08 at 12:20 +0200, Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

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.

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, 2022-09-08 at 10:13 +0200, Marius Schwarz wrote: > 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 Though I don't know

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, Sep 8, 2022, at 10:13, Marius Schwarz wrote: > Am 06.09.22 um 20:28 schrieb Ben Cotton: >> * Unify Python bindings > > 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

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

Am 06.09.22 um 20:28 schrieb Ben Cotton: * Removal of duplicated implementation ** LIBDNF evolved from LIBHIF (PackageKit library) and HAWKEY (DNF library). The integration was never finished, therefore LIBDNF still contains duplicated functionality. ** decrease of the code maintenance cost in

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 3:17 PM Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 2:29 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReplaceDnfWithDnf5 > > > > This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes > > process, proposals are publicly announced in

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 2:29 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReplaceDnfWithDnf5 > > This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes > process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive > community feedback. This proposal will only be

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 02:28:41PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > supermin Supermin requires only that: dnf download --destdir= [list of pkgs] [-c configfile] works *as non-root* (or some equivalent of that command as non-root) to download the RPMs. Does dnf5 support that? Note it's especially

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 14:28 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > == Scope == > * Proposal owners: > > DNF5 is still in the development and some of the features or options > are not yet available. We still have to finish the implementation of > Modularity, storing internal data related to History and

Re: F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

On 06/09/2022 20:28, Ben Cotton wrote: The new DNF5 will provide a symlink to `/usr/bin/dnf` therefore users will see the replacement as an upgrade of DNF with limited but documented syntax changes. The DNF5 will provide some compatible aliases of commands and options to improve adoption of the

F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReplaceDnfWithDnf5 This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved by the Fedora Engineering Steering

F39 proposal: Replace DNF with DNF5 (System-Wide Change proposal)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReplaceDnfWithDnf5 This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved by the Fedora Engineering Steering