Re: another dnf kernel issue?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tuesday, February 10, 2015, Radek Holy <rholy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Does "sudo dnf remove kernel*-3.18.3*" work for you?

>From the DNF's persepective (http://dnf.readthedocs.org/en/latest/command_ref.html#specifying-packages), your specification is in the form "name" (because of the missing dash) and there is no package with a name matching "kernel*3.18.3*". Also in the second query, it is assumed that the name must match "kernel*3.18.3".

TBH, I don't know whether we should extend the forms of package specifications to support your case. The current behaviour seems to be safer to me. I mean, if we improve it, user wouldn't be able to query just package names as easily as now.
--
Radek Holý
Associate Software Engineer
Software Management Team
Red Hat Czech

Days ago when I tried to install/remove 7000+ packages from half-completed downloading in Neal's way, it didn't work at all.

But without asterisk in the command, things could be harder once there are numerous RPMs being taken.


--

Yours sincerely,
Christopher Meng

http://cicku.me
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux