Am 13.04.2015 um 16:45 schrieb Richard W.M. Jones:
I see that dnf has sprung apt-style configuration file messages:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
$ sudo dnf install mingw32-srvany
Using metadata from Mon Apr 13 13:56:00 2015 (1:43:07 hours old)
Package mingw32-srvany-1.0-15.20150115gitfd659e77.fc23.noarch is already installed, skipping.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Configuration file '/etc/pam.d/fingerprint-auth'
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 19 Feb 21 2012 /etc/pam.d/fingerprint-auth -> fingerprint-auth-ac
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 701 May 9 2012 /etc/pam.d/fingerprint-auth.rpmnew
==> Package distributor has shipped an updated version.
What would you like to do about it ? Your options are:
Y or I : install the package maintainer's version
N or O : keep your currently-installed version
D : show the differences between the versions
M : merge configuration files
Z : background this process to examine the situation
S : skip this file
The default action is to keep your current version.
*** aliases (Y/I/N/O/D/M/Z/S) [default=N] ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In fact I _didn't_ change that file, so the message is wrong.
I suspect we'll end up with Debian interactive installs, which as a
Debian user I find to be a regression.
- 'dnf -y install' doesn't suppress the message
WHAT? dnf really should be deleayed to F23 or F24 -y is a unconditional thing the only correct result is .rpmnew
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
