On 18.8.2017 17:24, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 17:03:57 +0200, Petr Stodulka wrote: > >>>> # dnf remove setup > >> rpm is low level tool. No, I am talking just about use of dnf which is high level tool for working >> with packages/modules. > > *ouch* Covering such a corner-case is of limited use, IMO. > What other package tools would benefit from such a protection? > It's corner case, but user is user. We could say same thing about udev, systemd, dnf... Why these are protected? Who would want to remove it from the system, when they know such operation will break system significantly? The protection has some purpose and for me is not relevant, how much is possible, that someone would do that improbably action. I saw many situations that were *impossible*, but user can do everything. So the elementary set of packages should be protected. > If, on the contrary, dnf decided to remove such packages during a normal > updates while running into depsolving troubles, _that_ would be interesting > to fix (because removing a package without replacing it would be a big bug). > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > -- Petr Stodulka Core Services (In-place upgrades and migrations) IRC nicks: pstodulk, skytak Red Hat
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
