On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:45 am, Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Yesterday, I have updated my Rawhide and wondered why `dnf autoremove`
would want to remove earlyoom just to discover that soft dependency in
earlyoom was dropped [1] and hence nothing requires earlyoom and DNF
is
free to remove this package (and it is possibly not installed anymore
on
upgraded systems).
Therefore I wonder what is the status of EarlyOOM. Should I let the
package go? If not, then the situation should be fixed somehow,
probably
either by reverting the revert or adding the dependency into
fedora-release as was proposed elsewhere.
We're tracking this problem in
https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/138 and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814306. It's high priority
for Workstation, but it's blocked on dnf. We've been working around it
in an ad-hoc way for each package we add in a different way in every
release. In this case, I removed our original workaround in
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/earlyoom/pull-request/2 because we
intended to replace it with a new workaround,
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/catanzaro/rpms/fedora-release/c/a0df346ba7851111363adccdedeab4cc5d3edb24?branch=master.
However, we decided the new workaround was a little outrageous and we
would just wait for a dnf fix instead. In the meantime, if you want to
keep earlyoom, don't use autoremove. In the meantime, it will get
pulled in on upgrades to F32 due to the old workaround, but it's not
currently being pulled in on upgrades to F33.
Michael
_______________________________________________
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
