Yes, sorry, forget what I wrote. I messed up mock with yum, that's why. It's too late for me to chime in here. Sorry for the noise.
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Am 13.01.2014 00:43, schrieb Alec Leamas:
> First of all, this is not, and have never been a question of disabled repos. Or should not have. "yum clean all"
> refers to cleaning all metadata, not all repos. It only operates on one single repo, be it implicit (the default
> link) or an explicit -r option.
>
> This is what confuses. I know: been there done that... Even though the documents are clear, the behaviour does
> indeed cause confusion for some reason even though it's well-defined.
>
> Of course, changing semantics for yum is a bad idea, agreed. I did not have anything like that in mind. At most,
> some info on what buildroot which is used in the output, or similar measures.
>
> For dnf, I guess one could possibly think somewhat more free. Personally, I tend to think that it's the implicit
> buildroot which causes much of this trouble.
>
> What happens if we get rid of the implcit buildroot, forcing us to specify it every time? With 'default' as a legal
> option? Personally, I tend to think this might make things a little clearer.
*what* is a "buildroot" in case of YUM/DNF?
in any case nothing relevant for a user and said that i use Fedora and YUM for
many years, the only conetxt of "buildroot" for me is rpmbuild and that has no
context to YUM/DNF at all
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
