-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon 28 Jan 2013 09:43:56 AM EST, Jan Zelený wrote: > On 28. 1. 2013 at 08:21:57, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> On 01/28/2013 07:58 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: >>> = Features/YumGroupsAsObjects = >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/YumGroupsAsObjects >>> >>> Feature owner(s): James Antill <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Change the default yum configuration from group_command=compat to >>> group_command=objects. >>> >>> == Detailed description == Currently yum groups work as a simple >>> substitution, so "yum group remove foo" works as though you took >>> every package from foo and passed it to "yum remove". This tends to >>> not be what users expect, for example "yum group install kde- >>> desktop" and then "yum group remove kde-desktop" will end up >>> removing packages (like abrt-desktop). This feature changes that so >>> that groups are installed as real objects, meaning that when a user >>> does "yum group install foo" yum will mark that the packages from >>> foo are being installed (as before) but also that a group called >>> foo is being installed and that those packages are installed >>> because of it. Later if the group is removed, yum will remove the >>> group and only those packages that were installed because of the >>> group install/upgrade commands. >> >> This doesn't really seem like the optimal solution here. It seems to >> me that it might be a better solution that you note which "groups" >> were installed and then at 'yum group remove foo' you remove any >> packages in it that are not ALSO owned by other installed groups. That >> seems less prone to issues if you uninstall groups that have shared >> packages in anything other than reverse order of installation. >> >> Of course, after that we also have the issue of leaf nodes. Perhaps we >> should ignore any packages that are dependencies of other installed >> software too? > > Thank you for pointing this out. We are aware of this issue and we plan to > address it. James already implemented something similar for repositories and > to implement the same thing for groups, we first need groups to be treated as > objects. > > Anyway as the proposal indicates, changing the default (treating groups as > objects) won't have any impact on the behavior in this way. If you uninstall > group, it will remove any packages that have been installed as dependencies. > But the same thing happens today. AFAIU the only difference in behavior > observed by users will be that packages that are explicitly installed won't be > removed once the group is removed. > While this is obviously an enhancement over the current state of things, I'm not certain it's a sufficient improvement to warrant a Feature. In my mind, the difficulty with handling the descendant packages on removal is a more interesting problem. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlEGlV0ACgkQeiVVYja6o6PuoACfYM8rex0M06mRgUrMuFOGrQtj qMcAn329k7jfDUgz3ccbyfoTk1pSZxGB =4YsU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
