On 12/17/14 05:51, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: > On 12/16/14 22:32, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: >> Hm, could it be due to 'kernel' missing here? > > Apparently not: > > "Moreover, the currently booted kernel package is always protected." > > (from > <http://rpm-software-management.github.io/dnf-plugins-core/protected_packages.html>) > > So, still strange that it wants to remove my running kernel... > > I also noted that "dnf erase kernel deletes all packages called kernel" is > still on <http://dnf.readthedocs.org/en/latest/cli_vs_yum.html> :) > > On the same page it says "No --skip-broken". I have used this quite often > when a single packages stops other packages from being updated. The example > on the dnf vs. yum page, "There is no equivalent for yum --skip-broken update > foo, as silently skipping foo in this case only amounts to masking an error > contradicting the user request." is missing the point of the --skip-broken > switch, in my opinion. Or will dnf install all updates except the one that is > broken (in my use case)? (I have not tested dnf that much to have experienced > this myself) >
bugzilla time seems in order? -- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
