Re: Proposal: drop delta rpms (for real this time)

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

 



On 2/24/23 12:35 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 2023-02-24 07:42, Robert Marcano via devel wrote:
Does DNF on RHEL for example do something different when --security is involved? Because the RHEL documentation talks about it as a feature to use. Is a lack of metadata for previous updates the problem or the implementation?


I don't have the log, but I checked this about a month ago:

I can set up an 8.3 system (I used a UBI container, to be specific) and subscribe to Red Hat's repositories. Since 8.3, there has been a security update to bash, but the most recent bash package is not a security fix. If I run |dnf update --security bash|, the system will offer the most recent bash package, even though it is not a security fix. Naturally, if I run |dnf update bash|, I get the same offer.

So on RHEL, dnf will evidently offer to update a package to the current version if any of the available update candidates are marked as a security update.  And there are multiple update candidates in RHEL repositories, as well as CentOS Stream repositories, unlike Fedora.

Thanks for testing it. So, if there is a desire to "fix" this in Fedora, having the repository includes the latest package marked as a security update and the latest one. I am not sure that will solve much because it still depends, as other posts said, Fedora has more open rules for updates, than enterprise distributions and therea are entire version jumps without tracking errata metadata.

So, from my point of view the biggest problem with "dnf update --security" on Fedora is that rpm doesn't track minor-version dependencies of libraries without versioned symbols, which means that "dnf update --security" can easily break the system by updating a leaf package but not updating dependencies that have added new interfaces that it requires.  (But I'm working on fixing that.)
_______________________________________________
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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
_______________________________________________
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
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[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