Bug 1952656 - F33+ "DNF System Upgrade" needs changes.
Summary: F33+ "DNF System Upgrade" needs changes.
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Fedora Documentation
Classification: Fedora
Component: install-guide
Version: devel
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Petr Bokoc
QA Contact: Fedora Docs QA
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2021-04-22 18:37 UTC by Bill
Modified: 2022-07-07 14:51 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: ---
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

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] }'


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.