On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 15:52 +0100, Littoz wrote: > Experiencing a mis-hap in an update, I wanted to back up one step by > removing the suspected package. I then selected this package with YumEx > (graphical front-end for yum) in the "installed list" and asked it to be > removed. To my surprise, the dependency "transitive closure computation" > concluded that nearly all packages should be removed, even ones not > clearly related to my purpose (Explanation by the example: cups to be > removed; after dependency, open-office, kde, gnome, ..., maybe even > kernel to be removed also). > > If the dependency computation used for package removal is the same as > for inclusion, it seems to me this is a design flaw. For inclusion, it > is perfectly right to compute a transitive closure and to add all > packages needed. For deletion, the dependency computation should only > decrement the "in-use" counter of the referenced package. Only when this > in-use counter goes to zero should the referenced package be put on the > removal list. Think of the way the i-nodes are deleted by Unix-like OS > in presence of hard links. > > I admit that in some circumstances this approach can't be totally > fail-safe. For instance, you included an "independant" package A (not > referenced nor referencing). You then install package B referencing A. > If you remove B, you also remove A. But this situation can be quite > manageable compared to the present flooding strategy capable of > dramatically damaging a working system. > > Configuration: > yum 3.0.6 (not the most up-to-date but coming from packages FC6) > yumex 2.0.1 > i686 box running linux 2.6.22 > What package were you trying to remove when you encountered the above problem? -sv _______________________________________________ Yum mailing list Yum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum
