Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

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

 



On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 07:29:54PM +0200, Igor Raits wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> 
> On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 18:42 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Other possibility is to modify DNF to not touch such packages. Not
> > sure
> > if that would be better. Or is there already some functionality which
> > would exclude the package from dnf transaction, something like:
> > 
> > ~~~
> > # This package won't be installed, but will obsolete other packages
> > Provides: libsolv-self-destruct-pkg()
> > 
> > ~~~
> > 
> > we use in fedora-obsolete-packages?
> 
> Since they do not block the upgrades, does it really matter? However, I
> agree that DNF removing packages that are not present in upgrade repo
> and blocking the upgrade, should be removed automatically.
> 
That's the distinction between upgrade and distro-sync.

-- Petr

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
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

[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