On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 5:46 AM ToddAndMargo via users < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/22/24 02:38, Samuel Sieb wrote: > > On 10/22/24 2:25 AM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: > >> On 10/22/24 02:22, Samuel Sieb wrote: > >>> On 10/22/24 2:04 AM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote: > >>>> What replaces --skip-broken in dnf5? > >>>> > >>>> # dnf --releasever=40 --skip-broken upgrade > >>>> Unknown argument "--skip-broken" for command "dnf5". Add "--help" > >>>> for more information about the arguments. > >>> > >>> How did you end up with dnf5? That might explain some of your issues. > >> > >> I presume it was part of the upgrade to 40 > >> > >> # rpm -qa dnf > >> dnf-4.21.1-1.fc39.noarch > >> > >> # which dnf > >> /usr/bin/dnf > >> > >> # ls -al /usr/bin/dnf > >> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 4 Sep 19 17:00 /usr/bin/dnf -> dnf5 > > > > Maybe it was the failed upgrade to 41. > > Most probably! > > > I'm on 40 and have this: > > # rpm -q dnf > > dnf-4.21.1-1.fc40.noarch > > # ls -l /usr/bin/dnf > > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 5 Aug 14 17:00 /usr/bin/dnf -> dnf-3 > > > > What does "rpm -qf /usr/bin/dnf5" give you? > > # rpm -qf /usr/bin/dnf5 > file /usr/bin/dnf5 is not owned by any package > > > > > I do have dnf5 also installed, but it's not supposed to be the default > > and I'm pretty sure that I installed it myself to test something. > > > Since I am going to be on 41 pretty quick, do you know > what dnf5 did with skip-broken? > > Oh and get this, I am still on 38's kernel! > > > Doesn't 41 still offer dnf? I have both installed on 40.
-- _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 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/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
