On 20.06.2014 14:11, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 20.06.2014 14:04, schrieb Tim Lauridsen: >> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Dennis Gilmore <dennis@xxxxxxxx <mailto:dennis@xxxxxxxx>> wrote: >> >> In testing dnf on rawhide I nearly always do "dnf clean metadata && dnf update" purely because I found most of >> the time dnfs metadata was out of date. To me dnf fetching the metadata behind the scenes just doesn't work >> right. But I'm not sure that me or rawhide fits into the experience dnf is trying to give. >> >> Dennis >> >> >> Dnf-0.5.2 has a --refresh option, there will a check if the repo metadata is newer than the cached one. >> >> so. >> >> dnf update --refresh will check and update metadata if needed > > *that* would be a useful default instead background-refreshes > I think these are two separate issues. Independent of the background refreshes dnf should always check if its current view of the world is up-to-date (that is the data in its cache is current). This can be fairly important when it comes to security issues. When a fatal exploit is fixed in a package you don't want dnf to say that there are not updates available when this is in fact not true. Regards, Dennis -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
