Re: dnf v.s. yum
On 16. 6. 2014 at 07:19:45, Stephen Morris wrote: > On 06/15/2014 11:23 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > > On 06/15/14 19:02, Tim wrote: > >> On Sun, 2014-06-15 at 18:27 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: > >>> OK I read FAQ. > >>> > >>> http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/user_faq.html#why-do-i-get-different-resul > >>> ts-with-dnf-update-vs-yum-update > >>> > >>> And the one following it "Is it possible to force DNF to get the > >>> latest metadata on dnf upgrade?" > >>> > >>> Running KDE and the notifications in the systray showed there are 12 > >>> updates available. Figured I give dnf a try, which I've done from > >>> time to time, but it showed no packages to update. OKso clean > >>> metadata for both yum and dnf > >>> > >>> ran both "yum check-update" and "dnf check-update". > >>> > >>> yum listed the 12 > >> > >> And dnf offered nothing... > >> > >> Is this just a case of whatever generates the metadata that yum uses, > >> and whatever else generates the metadata that dnf uses, do their > >> generation at different times? Or do they actually have a different set > >> of package files to look through? > >> > >> I can't help but wonder what changing from yum to dnf will do for mirror > >> sites. Are we going to see a prolonged period where various mirrors > >> stagnate? > > > > Right > > > > But, now it does I thought "clean metadata" would have done it > > But, clean expire-cache seems to have done the trick. > Can Yum cache updates and DNF cache updates interfere with each other? > Since installing DNF I randomly get out of space conditions on cache > updates which I have queried in another thread. I don't understand why > this occurs when the file I think it is trying to update is 25 GB in > size and there is 695 GB free space in the partition where the cache is. > Have you experienced this sort of thing, or should I be raising a bug > report (the issue with a bug report is at the moment I'm not sure if it > is DNF or Yum producing the error message, and, if it is Yum, given that > DNF is replacing Yum in Fedora 22 is anybody going to care anyway?). Hi Steve, I'm not sure I understand your situation entirely but the short version is: yum cache and dnf cache are two separate things so they do not interfere with each other. May I ask what 25G file do you have on fs that needs updating? I have never seen rpms of such size and quite frankly I was under the impression that it wasn't even possible to build them using rpm until recently. Thanks Jan -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf v.s. yum
On 06/15/2014 11:23 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: On 06/15/14 19:02, Tim wrote: On Sun, 2014-06-15 at 18:27 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: OK I read FAQ. http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/user_faq.html#why-do-i-get-different-results-with-dnf-update-vs-yum-update And the one following it "Is it possible to force DNF to get the latest metadata on dnf upgrade?" Running KDE and the notifications in the systray showed there are 12 updates available. Figured I give dnf a try, which I've done from time to time, but it showed no packages to update. OKso clean metadata for both yum and dnf ran both "yum check-update" and "dnf check-update". yum listed the 12 And dnf offered nothing... Is this just a case of whatever generates the metadata that yum uses, and whatever else generates the metadata that dnf uses, do their generation at different times? Or do they actually have a different set of package files to look through? I can't help but wonder what changing from yum to dnf will do for mirror sites. Are we going to see a prolonged period where various mirrors stagnate? Right But, now it does I thought "clean metadata" would have done it But, clean expire-cache seems to have done the trick. Can Yum cache updates and DNF cache updates interfere with each other? Since installing DNF I randomly get out of space conditions on cache updates which I have queried in another thread. I don't understand why this occurs when the file I think it is trying to update is 25 GB in size and there is 695 GB free space in the partition where the cache is. Have you experienced this sort of thing, or should I be raising a bug report (the issue with a bug report is at the moment I'm not sure if it is DNF or Yum producing the error message, and, if it is Yum, given that DNF is replacing Yum in Fedora 22 is anybody going to care anyway?). regards, Steve <>-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf v.s. yum
On 06/15/14 19:02, Tim wrote: > On Sun, 2014-06-15 at 18:27 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: >> OK I read FAQ. >> >> http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/user_faq.html#why-do-i-get-different-results-with-dnf-update-vs-yum-update >> >> And the one following it "Is it possible to force DNF to get the >> latest metadata on dnf upgrade?" >> >> Running KDE and the notifications in the systray showed there are 12 >> updates available. Figured I give dnf a try, which I've done from >> time to time, but it showed no packages to update. OKso clean >> metadata for both yum and dnf >> >> ran both "yum check-update" and "dnf check-update". >> >> yum listed the 12 > And dnf offered nothing... > > Is this just a case of whatever generates the metadata that yum uses, > and whatever else generates the metadata that dnf uses, do their > generation at different times? Or do they actually have a different set > of package files to look through? > > I can't help but wonder what changing from yum to dnf will do for mirror > sites. Are we going to see a prolonged period where various mirrors > stagnate? > Right But, now it does I thought "clean metadata" would have done it But, clean expire-cache seems to have done the trick. -- Do not condemn the judgment of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong. -- Dandemis -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf v.s. yum
On Sun, 2014-06-15 at 18:27 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: > OK I read FAQ. > > http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/user_faq.html#why-do-i-get-different-results-with-dnf-update-vs-yum-update > > And the one following it "Is it possible to force DNF to get the > latest metadata on dnf upgrade?" > > Running KDE and the notifications in the systray showed there are 12 > updates available. Figured I give dnf a try, which I've done from > time to time, but it showed no packages to update. OKso clean > metadata for both yum and dnf > > ran both "yum check-update" and "dnf check-update". > > yum listed the 12 And dnf offered nothing... Is this just a case of whatever generates the metadata that yum uses, and whatever else generates the metadata that dnf uses, do their generation at different times? Or do they actually have a different set of package files to look through? I can't help but wonder what changing from yum to dnf will do for mirror sites. Are we going to see a prolonged period where various mirrors stagnate? -- tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp Linux 3.14.6-200.fc20.i686 #1 SMP Sun Jun 8 02:14:30 UTC 2014 i686 All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point trying to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the public lists. George Orwell's '1984' was supposed to be a warning against tyranny, not a set of instructions for supposedly democratic governments. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
dnf v.s. yum
OK I read FAQ. http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/user_faq.html#why-do-i-get-different-results-with-dnf-update-vs-yum-update And the one following it "Is it possible to force DNF to get the latest metadata on dnf upgrade?" Running KDE and the notifications in the systray showed there are 12 updates available. Figured I give dnf a try, which I've done from time to time, but it showed no packages to update. OKso clean metadata for both yum and dnf ran both "yum check-update" and "dnf check-update". yum listed the 12 [root@meimei ~]# dnf check-update google-earth 74 kB/s | 4.8 kB 00:00 Fedora 20 - x86_64 - VirtualBox38 kB/s | 44 kB 00:01 Fedora 20 - x86_642.2 MB/s | 36 MB 00:15 RPM Fusion for Fedora 20 - Free - Updates 241 kB/s | 346 kB 00:01 Adobe Systems Incorporated2.7 kB/s | 1.8 kB 00:00 RPM Fusion for Fedora 20 - Nonfree - Updates 116 kB/s | 100 kB 00:00 RPM Fusion for Fedora 20 - Free 325 kB/s | 487 kB 00:01 Fedora 20 - x86_64 - Updates 2.0 MB/s | 23 MB 00:11 RPM Fusion for Fedora 20 - Nonfree 19 kB/s | 289 kB 00:15 [root@meimei ~]# -- Do not condemn the judgment of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong. -- Dandemis -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
