On Thu, May 26, 2016 5:17 am, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 05/26/2016 04:31 AM, Yamaban wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 May 2016 08:00, James Hogarth wrote:
>>> On 26 May 2016 00:57, "SternData" wrote:
>>>> On 05/25/2016 06:43 PM, Always Learning wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 22:32 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, yum had associations which it was sad to lose.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps the Fedora ("We love consulting all affected users")
>>>>> replacement
>>>>> could be named MUD.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now we await the System-D controlling interface ;-)
>>>>
>>>> There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth when these changes
>>>> rolled into Fedora. After a while, I got used to it and now it seems
>>>> normal. Plus, if you type "yum update" it responds "what your really
>>>> should type is dnf update, but I'll do it for you anyway".
>>>
>>> There was a mail on the Fedora development list recently from one of
>>> the
>>> internal Red Hat RHEL yum guys.
>>>
>>> It implied that in RHEL the command would remain yum and not change to
>>> dnf,
>>> although the internals will no doubt do so at some point.
>>
>> Well, from what I've heard from some Red Hat RHEL Kernel guys, it will
>> be
>> likely in RHEL 8.x as default with a yum compat cli, but unlikely to get
>> into RHEL 7.x as replacement for yum, and should stay confined to EPEL.
>> The reason given was: "(DNF is) not quite Enterprise ready, yet. Lets
>> look
>> again during Fedora 25".
>>
>
> Based on previous RHEL history I would agree with Yamaban's take
> (probably in RHEL 8.x, likely not in RHEL 7). But Red Hat has been a
> bit less conservative with making changes to RHEL 7 than they were the
> previous version of RHEL.
>
> Still, for them to make a change there would need to be some driving
> force for that change (IMHO). For example, if there were new technology
> areas (containers, cloud) where dnf had major functionality advantages
> over yum, then they might consider a change. Otherwise, I just don't
> see it.
How about their recent agreements with Microsoft? That would be enogh
driving force for them to account for all changes we observed so far IMHO
(didn't look into dnf details so I exclude that for the moment from my
comment...).
Valeri
>
> But, I have been wrong before .. a lot .. so take that with a grain of
> salt :)
>
> Thanks,
> Johnny Hughes
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
