Re: dnf history - change in how rpmdb checksum is computed

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

 



On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 09:06:13AM +0200, Michael Mraka wrote:
> > 
> > Is there a reason why we can't change YUM to match the DNF behavior?
> > IMO, the YUM behavior is nonsense and isn't even a valid package
> > identifier.
> 
> Actually E:N-V-R.A is yum-ism no one else understand
> while N-E:V-R.A is correct rpm format.
> 
> So if you want make world a better place stick with current dnf format.

  I think this, with the combination of earlier suggestion, is the
best solution for Fedora. So:
1) make yum calculate checksum primarly with DNF format
2) when there's a discrepancy, let yum calculate csum in legacy yum format

 This way:
 - dnf is not bothered
 - users of yum have continuous history
 - new yum users have checksum calculated in better way

 Win-win!

-- 
Tomasz Torcz                Only gods can safely risk perfection,
xmpp: zdzichubg@xxxxxxxxx     it's a dangerous thing for a man.  -- Alia
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/TT3ZVQBBJGQGQYIVOWBC7L6Y2D5WCF4J/




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [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