Bug 1952656

Summary:	F33+ "DNF System Upgrade" needs changes.
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora Documentation	Reporter:	Bill <mattison.computer>
Component:	install-guide	Assignee:	Petr Bokoc <pbokoc>
Status:	NEW ---	QA Contact:	Fedora Docs QA <docs-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	devel	CC:	aner, mattison.computer, pbokoc, zach
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	---
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:		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 Bill 2021-04-22 18:37:25 UTC

Description of problem:

The F33 (and newer) "DNF System Upgrade" instructions document has a couple of minor issues, and one more serious problem.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

Fedora-33, and probably newer.

How reproducible:

not applicable.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. not applicable.
2. not applicable.
3. not applicable.

Actual results:

not applicable.

Expected results:

not applicable.

Additional info:

I. The "Clean-Up Old Packages" Section (2 minor issues).

In the "Clean-Up Old Packages" section, the instructions first say to do "sudo dnf repoquery --unsatisfied", and then to do "sudo dnf repoquery --duplicates". After that, there is a "NOTE" box saying to first do "sudo dnf update". After the "NOTE" box, the instructions say to do "sudo dnf list extras", and so on.

A. Assuming that the "NOTE" box is saying to do the "sudo dnf update" before doing the "sudo dnf repoquery --unsatisfied" and the "sudo dnf repoquery --duplicates", the box should be moved to between
* the "Clean-Up Old Packages" section title, and
* the instruction to do "sudo dnf repoquery --unsatisfied".
So it should be:
1. The section title "Clean_Up Old Packages";
2. The "NOTE" box for sudo dnf update";
3. instruction to run "sudo dnf repoquery --unsatisfied";
4. instruction to run "sudo dnf repoquery --duplicates"; and
5. instructions to run "sudo dnf list extras", and so on.

B. According to the dnf man page, the "update" command is deprecated. It is now "upgrade". So the dnf command in the "NOTE" box discussed above should be "sudo dnf upgrade", not "sudo dnf update".

II. The "Clean-Up Old Symlinks" Section (more serious problem).

In the Fedora users list, in the thread "invisible application after upgrade", one member said that the "sudo symlinks -r -d /usr"
step isn't necessarily a good idea. He provided an example. There was a little more discussion in the Fedora users list thread "dangling symlinks and upgrades (was "invisible application after upgrade").". This section needs to be either redone or deleted. I do not have the expertise to be more specific. I am a home user with no training as a sys.admin. I have a stand-alone home work station. I do my own systems administration. So I rely on the Fedora "DNF System Upgrade" document to guide me through semi-annual upgrades. I ask that this section be researched and either improved or deleted as appropriate.

Comment 1 Aner Perez 2022-07-07 14:51:48 UTC

I just did an upgrade to Fedora 36 and running "sudo symlinks -r /usr" returned 210 results which were ALL symlinks installed by packages on the system.

I don't think this step is very useful but if trying to be thorough, the following shell command would only list the dangling symlinks that are NOT part of an installed package.

sudo symlinks -r /usr |awk -F'dangling: ' '/^dangling/ { split($2,symlinkparts," -> "); RET=system("rpm -q -f " symlinkparts[1] " >/dev/null"); if (RET != 0) print symlinkparts[1] }'