Am 17.01.2016 um 23:54 schrieb Kevin Fenzi:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 23:27:02 +0100 Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:for localupdate i switched back to yum-deprecated long ago, but for ordinary kernel updates pretend unsolved deps is simply unacceptable *no* i am not the only one - see karma comments for 4.3.3-300.fc23But your comment doesn't explain what you are even doing. What was the command and all output?
just "dnf upgrade" and DNF don't give any useful output, even not with "dnf -v upgrade" in the last case with *no local* packages
For localling installing new kernel versions, I use 'dnf install' and it works just fine here.
"dnf update *.rpm" is the way which has to work
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1263888#c14 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271676This seems like a matter of taste. If you want to keep yearly logs, set your logrotate that way.
AFAIR the config files are not config noreplace"
may i suggest to forget that dnf ever existed and switch back to yum?You can suggest it, but it's not going to happen, so I'd advise relaxing some and working with dnf developers.
what more than report bugs months ago which can be reprodcued with nearly every "dnf update *.rpm" when there are sub-packages with inter-dependencies
better adivse the dnf evelopers to work together with reporters and just try "dnf update *.rpm" which worked in case of "yum update *.rpm" forever
I'd encourage you to re-read our code of conduct ( https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct ) and try and be more respectful in bugs and here. We are all trying to improve things, lets work together
in case of such obvious bugs this *is* resepectful
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
