On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 5:46 AM ToddAndMargo via users <users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 10/22/24 02:38, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 10/22/24 2:25 AM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
>> On 10/22/24 02:22, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>>> On 10/22/24 2:04 AM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
>>>> What replaces --skip-broken in dnf5?
>>>>
>>>> # dnf --releasever=40 --skip-broken upgrade
>>>> Unknown argument "--skip-broken" for command "dnf5". Add "--help"
>>>> for more information about the arguments.
>>>
>>> How did you end up with dnf5? That might explain some of your issues.
>>
>> I presume it was part of the upgrade to 40
>>
>> # rpm -qa dnf
>> dnf-4.21.1-1.fc39.noarch
>>
>> # which dnf
>> /usr/bin/dnf
>>
>> # ls -al /usr/bin/dnf
>> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 4 Sep 19 17:00 /usr/bin/dnf -> dnf5
>
> Maybe it was the failed upgrade to 41.
Most probably!
> I'm on 40 and have this:
> # rpm -q dnf
> dnf-4.21.1-1.fc40.noarch
> # ls -l /usr/bin/dnf
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 5 Aug 14 17:00 /usr/bin/dnf -> dnf-3
>
> What does "rpm -qf /usr/bin/dnf5" give you?
# rpm -qf /usr/bin/dnf5
file /usr/bin/dnf5 is not owned by any package
>
> I do have dnf5 also installed, but it's not supposed to be the default
> and I'm pretty sure that I installed it myself to test something.
Since I am going to be on 41 pretty quick, do you know
what dnf5 did with skip-broken?
Oh and get this, I am still on 38's kernel!
Doesn't 41 still offer dnf? I have both installed on 40.
-- _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 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/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
