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@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to