On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 01:47 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 10. 05. 20 20:48, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > Basically we are switching from 'I go and install > > fedora-obsolete-packages and have opted in to it' to 'I have to go > > explictly exclude it to keep my obsolete packges'. > > As others have pointed out, this was never the case of 'I go and install > fedora-obsolete-packages and have opted in to it' -- this was always the case of > 'fedora-obsolete-packages obsoletes something I had installed, so it is pulled > in by dep resolver'. Uh. Are we *sure* about that? Same as Kevin, that is not how I recall this working. I've long worked under the belief that this if Y Obsoletes: X, but you don't have Y installed (and nothing else in the update would cause it to be pulled in), running 'dnf update' with a repo that contains Y enabled is not going to install Y and remove X. X will stay there. Obsoletes: only kick in if the package that does the obsoleting is installed, or is included in the transaction. This is - AIUI - why the packaging guidelines say, when you rename a package, that the new package should Obsoletes: *and Provides:* the old package: without the Provides:, you cannot expect the new package to reliably replace the old one. Are you *sure* that DNF doesn't behave this way? The idea surprises me. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
