On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 13:26:01 -0400,
Will Woods <wwoods@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 2015-06-26 at 11:32 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Having done a few mass updates using DNF over the last few months, I
have
noticed that their depsolver handles complicated messes better than
yum did,
and can proceed with partial updates where yum used fail entirely.
...that's really more about policy than any technical reason, though:
DNF `upgrade` is roughly equivalent to `yum upgrade --skip-broken`.
If you use `dnf upgrade --best` you get the yum default behavior, which
will fail when there are broken deps - just like yum did.
yum update --skip-broken sometimes fails in complicated cases and dnf update
doesn't seem to. I thought I had seen a direct comparison with
yum-deprecated, but I think --skip-broken wasn't being used on that system
by default. But given I have seen yum fail to do any updates when --skip-broken
was used even though there were updatable packages (which I updated with yum
by specifying a subset of packages) and I have not seen this happen with
dnf, I do think that dnf update will work in some cases where yum --skip-broken
won't.
I have been disappointed in dnf update --best --allowerasing, as there seems
to be some limitations (that I haven't figured out) on what it will erase and
I end up having to manually erase packages that are pinning old versions
of libraries, to get stuff to update.
--
desktop mailing list
desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
