Bug 1155878
| Summary: | "dnf history list all" has different output then "dnf history list" | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Vít Ondruch <vondruch> |
| Component: | dnf | Assignee: | Packaging Maintenance Team <packaging-team-maint> |
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | akozumpl, jsilhan, mluscon, packaging-team-maint, pnemade, rholy, tim.lauridsen |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2014-10-23 07:46:28 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Vít Ondruch
2014-10-23 04:58:51 UTC
Given that you already looked at man pages you must know that DNF does not support a command called "history list all". Excuse me? So what does the "dnf history list all" does then? What does the "all" do? Trying some other "random" parameters, DNF fails, so it definitely understands to parameter "all" and it definitely gives me different results (although trying now on different machine with less entries in history, I can't see difference). BTW, code ```import dnf; dnf.Base().install('package', reponame='fedora')``` also does not produce a ```TypeError``` although the "reponame" parameter is not in the documentation.
It's simple. If it's not in the documentation, it isn't supported. The thing that DNF *accepts* an undocumented argument does not mean that it *understands* it. If it's not in the documentation, then there is no definition of what given command does. Then you cannot expect any behavior and you cannot say that the behavior is buggy (= differs from the expectation).
Maybe you want to file a bug reporting that DNF does not throw an error in this case.
Or maybe you want to file an RFE asking for the support of this command although I don't understand why would be need two commands doing the same thing. Here it goes: bug #1155918 Thanks. |