Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39

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


On Tue, 2023-08-29 at 10:33 +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
>   Problem 2: package ghc-data-array-byte- from @System requires, but none of the providers can be installed
>    - ghc-array- from @System  does not belong to a distupgrade repository
>    - problem with installed package ghc-data-array-byte-
> Looks like package got dropped in meantime.

Such packages ought to be obsoleted by something - if nothing else, by
fedora-obsolete-packages . You can file a bug or PR asking for it to be
added there.
> DNF5 managed to solve problems on it's own:
> Transaction Summary:
>   Installing:       47 packages
>   Upgrading:      3803 packages
>   Replacing:      3841 packages
>   Removing:          7 packages
>   Downgrading:      28 packages

This is likely because it defaults to `--allowerasing` behaviour? This
is kinda a controversial topic. GNOME Software also does this, and I
don't *love* it as it can result in people being surprised by packages
having disappeared on upgrade. ('allowerasing' means, basically, if a
package like this is blocking the transaction, just remove it).
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: | Mastodon: @adamw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct:
List Guidelines:
List Archives:
Do not reply to spam, report it:

[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