On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 00.56.23 WEST Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > I just tested it on F32 Workstation and for me it does. Have you > cleaned dnf's databases by any chance? I think either that or having > the packages as dependencies of something that was installed by the > user would prevent them from going away with dmraid.
IIRC this is probably related with the dependencies of anaconda:
# repoquery --whatrequires 'dmraid' --recursive Last metadata expiration check: 0:14:34 ago on Tue 30 Jun 2020 09:14:30 AM WEST. anaconda-0:32.24.5-1.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-0:32.24.7-1.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-0:32.24.7-2.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-install-env-deps-0:32.24.5-1.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-install-env-deps-0:32.24.7-1.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-install-env-deps-0:32.24.7-2.fc32.x86_64 anaconda-realmd-0:0.2-12.fc32.noarch dmraid-0:1.0.0.rc16-44.fc32.i686 dmraid-0:1.0.0.rc16-44.fc32.x86_64 dmraid-devel-0:1.0.0.rc16-44.fc32.x86_64 dmraid-events-0:1.0.0.rc16-44.fc32.x86_64 dmraid-events-logwatch-0:1.0.0.rc16-44.fc32.x86_64 kdump-anaconda-addon-0:005-8.20200220git80aab11.fc32.noarch libblockdev-dm-0:2.23-2.fc32.i686 libblockdev-dm-0:2.23-2.fc32.x86_64 libblockdev-dm-0:2.24-1.fc32.i686 libblockdev-dm-0:2.24-1.fc32.x86_64 libblockdev-dm-devel-0:2.23-2.fc32.i686 libblockdev-dm-devel-0:2.23-2.fc32.x86_64 libblockdev-dm-devel-0:2.24-1.fc32.i686 libblockdev-dm-devel-0:2.24-1.fc32.x86_64 libblockdev-plugins-all-0:2.23-2.fc32.x86_64 libblockdev-plugins-all-0:2.24-1.fc32.x86_64 oscap-anaconda-addon-0:1.0-6.fc32.noarch
-- José Abílio |
_______________________________________________ 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