> I spent most of yesterday repairing a rawhide VM that had a bad upgrade,
> resulting in dnf segfaulting and making the machine difficult to fix.
> Had to build a second rawhide VM as a baseline to guide a manual
> download and install of affected RPMs. Very not happy, and I would
> advise more t
> I've been actually using dnf5 daily and while it's a little rough
> around the edges it seems usable enough.
I agree, I would like to see dnf5 staying in rawhide.
Otherwise I don't think it will receive sufficient testing.
> (1) The allow_vendor_change option makes things strange. I think this
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 12:38 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 6:11 AM Peter Robinson wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 10:21 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 6:23 AM Jaroslav Mracek
> > > > > > >
> > > > Does that mean the issues with dnf [2
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 6:11 AM Peter Robinson wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 10:21 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 6:23 AM Jaroslav Mracek > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Does that mean the issues with dnf [2] we able to be solved all the
> > > time but just weren't inves
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 10:21 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 6:23 AM Jaroslav Mracek > wrote:
> >
> > Does that mean the issues with dnf [2] we able to be solved all the
> > time but just weren't investigated?
>
> The issue was investigated also with DNF, but the issue wa
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 6:23 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
>
> Does that mean the issues with dnf [2] we able to be solved all the
> time but just weren't investigated?
The issue was investigated also with DNF, but the issue was well hidden,
because the code uses hard coded set for downloaded ele
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 6:23 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 6:40 AM Jaroslav Mracek > wrote:
> >
> > Except dnf5 broke a number of microdnf usecases with low memory where
> > microdnf worked [1].
> >
> > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2214520
>
> Correct
> On 7/17/23 07:39, Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
>
> Hi, I put more details in the fesco ticket:
> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3039#comment-864686 I believe these are
> commonly known so I did not open any ticket against dnf5.
>
> As said in the comment, I stopped putting effort into making dnf5 wo
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 6:40 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
>
> Except dnf5 broke a number of microdnf usecases with low memory where
> microdnf worked [1].
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2214520
Correct but as you can see the issue was not in DNF5 but in libsolv (solver for
> On 7/13/23 23:59, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> +1 for postponing. We have hit issues preparing CI environment via
> ansible and applying workarounds to make dnf5 work is imho not the way
> to go with such core tool. It should be there as opt-in so it can get
> tested but not default.
The probl
Hello,
> We keep the list of issues tracked here:
> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/894
> And namely, https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/issues/617
> seems like a showstopper ATM. At least as long as we have to check
> GPG signatures at koji buildroot installat
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 01:37:35PM +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
>
> As I understand how DNF5 team works, they keep updating DNF5 quickly
> enough even in Fedora 38 (but the 'dnf -> dnf-3' exists, instead of
> 'dnf -> dnf5').
>
> I'm a bit lost in the minor numbers; and Mirek is right, not all the
On 7/17/23 07:39, Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
Hello Pavel,
May I ask you to be more specific what is the problem with including
references for issues? I am not sure whether your issues are related to
issues referenced by Fabio or whether you have in mind something else.
It will help us to prioriti
On pátek 14. července 2023 14:30:03 CEST Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 14. 07. 23 v 2:11 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> > On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 12:26:27AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >> Dne 13. 07. 23 v 23:59 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
> >>> - rawhide mock / koji builds still default to dnf-3 (DNF 4)
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 6:40 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote:
>
> Hello Pavel,
>
> May I ask you to be more specific what is the problem with including
> references for issues? I am not sure whether your issues are related to
> issues referenced by Fabio or whether you have in mind something else. It
Hello Pavel,
May I ask you to be more specific what is the problem with including
references for issues? I am not sure whether your issues are related to
issues referenced by Fabio or whether you have in mind something else. It
will help us to prioritize the work.
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 10:50 AM
I've been actually using dnf5 daily and while it's a little rough
around the edges it seems usable enough.
Here are some notes ...
(1) The allow_vendor_change option makes things strange. I think this
feature should be turned off (ie True) until it is fixed properly.
https://github.com/rpm-soft
Dne 14. 07. 23 v 2:11 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 12:26:27AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 13. 07. 23 v 23:59 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
- rawhide mock / koji builds still default to dnf-3 (DNF 4)
Support for DNF5 landed in Mock
https://rpm-software-management.github.io/
Since DNF5 was forced upon me as a Rawhide user, I'd prefer to keep it
this way and actually rename DNF5 back to DNF to have e.g. man pages
correctly available.
Vít
Dne 13. 07. 23 v 23:59 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
Hi all,
I'm opening this thread to trigger discussion of the roadmap for DN
On 7/13/23 23:59, Fabio Valentini wrote:
Hi all,
I'm opening this thread to trigger discussion of the roadmap for DNF5
in Fedora 39 - whether the switch still looks doable for this release,
or whether it should be reverted for F39 and postponed to F40.
+1 for postponing. We have hit issues pre
On Fri, 2023-07-14 at 10:25 +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> DJ Delorie wrote on 2023/07/14 9:13:
> > Fabio Valentini writes:
> > > in Fedora 39 - whether the switch still looks doable for this release,
> > > or whether it should be reverted for F39 and postponed to F40.
> >
> > I spent most of yest
DJ Delorie wrote on 2023/07/14 9:13:
Fabio Valentini writes:
in Fedora 39 - whether the switch still looks doable for this release,
or whether it should be reverted for F39 and postponed to F40.
I spent most of yesterday repairing a rawhide VM that had a bad upgrade,
resulting in dnf segfault
Fabio Valentini writes:
> in Fedora 39 - whether the switch still looks doable for this release,
> or whether it should be reverted for F39 and postponed to F40.
I spent most of yesterday repairing a rawhide VM that had a bad upgrade,
resulting in dnf segfaulting and making the machine difficult
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 12:26:27AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 13. 07. 23 v 23:59 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
> > - rawhide mock / koji builds still default to dnf-3 (DNF 4)
>
> Support for DNF5 landed in Mock
>
> https://rpm-software-management.github.io/mock/Release-Notes-4.0
>
> In the
Once upon a time, Adam Williamson said:
> The biggest one for me is that offline updating - `dnf offline-upgrade`
> - still isn't implemented on dnf5. But I've run into quite a lot of
> smaller 'paper cuts', like `dnf history info ` doesn't
> work...just today I found that installing an older kern
On Thu, 2023-07-13 at 23:59 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm opening this thread to trigger discussion of the roadmap for DNF5
> in Fedora 39 - whether the switch still looks doable for this release,
> or whether it should be reverted for F39 and postponed to F40.
>
> This is also
Dne 13. 07. 23 v 23:59 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
- rawhide mock / koji builds still default to dnf-3 (DNF 4)
Support for DNF5 landed in Mock
https://rpm-software-management.github.io/mock/Release-Notes-4.0
In the meantime 4.1 was released.
I hope that in week or two we release 4.2 and we ca
Hi all,
I'm opening this thread to trigger discussion of the roadmap for DNF5
in Fedora 39 - whether the switch still looks doable for this release,
or whether it should be reverted for F39 and postponed to F40.
This is also being tracked in a FESCo ticket:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3039
The
28 matches
Mail list logo
