You said it was pretty close to compatible now, so I had a quick look. Not sure how much of these that you know about (using latest dnf in F18): missing commands: dnf upgrade dnf check-update dnf reinstall dnf shell dnf load-transaction dnf version dnf localinstall/localupdate/localupgrade dnf groups dnf check dnf deplist dnf repoinfo (a newer way to get repolist -v data) dnf install-n/install-na/etc. dnf remove-n/remove-na/etc. dnf update-to dnf distro-sync dnf resolvedep broken commands: dnf repolist (no output) dnf provides kernel (no output) dnf update kernel (kernel is provided by kernel-PAE, probably same root problems as provides command) dnf update /bin/cpio (causes traceback) dnf install /bin/cpio (says "nothing provides") dnf install /abcd (seems to run an empty transaction). dnf history rollback /undo/redo (API for install pkgtup/etc. not implemented) dnf makecache (doesn't seem to force recheck) dnf --disablerepo=fedora list yum (traceback for repo. APIs). dnf --showduplicates list yum (traceback no .verGT API on packages).
Hi James, Thank you for the testing, these are valid issues and I will look into them one by one. (In reply to comment #0) > You said it was pretty close to compatible now, so I had a quick look. I am not sure when I said these words? The DNF version in Fedora 18 is a preview version: I want to confirm the basic functionality of installing/updating/listing/erasing packages works and then add the Yum features back in one by one. Could you maybe, as a domain expert, try to pick the subset of the missing commands that are of highest priority? Thanks, Ales
(In reply to comment #1) > Hi James, > > Thank you for the testing, these are valid issues and I will look into them > one by one. > > (In reply to comment #0) > > You said it was pretty close to compatible now, so I had a quick look. > > I am not sure when I said these words? The DNF version in Fedora 18 is a > preview version: I want to confirm the basic functionality of > installing/updating/listing/erasing packages works and then add the Yum > features back in one by one. Sure, no problem ... I thought I heard you say that yesterday in the meeting. Maybe you were saying that install/remove was basically complete? Maybe I'm just going insane? (or already gone :) > Could you maybe, as a domain expert, try to > pick the subset of the missing commands that are of highest priority? I would do these first (in roughly this order), just on the assumption that people testing it in rawhide are more likely to run these and be confused if they don't exist: dnf upgrade (can just be a synonym for update atm.) dnf check-update dnf reinstall dnf distro-sync dnf update-to
(In reply to comment #2) > Sure, no problem ... I thought I heard you say that yesterday in the > meeting. Maybe you were saying that install/remove was basically complete? > Maybe I'm just going insane? (or already gone :) They are nowhere near CLI compatible yet, that is for sure:) > > > Could you maybe, as a domain expert, try to > > pick the subset of the missing commands that are of highest priority? > > I would do these first (in roughly this order), just on the assumption that > people testing it in rawhide are more likely to run these and be confused if > they don't exist: > > dnf upgrade (can just be a synonym for update atm.) > dnf check-update That already works on master, bug 868810, but since there's the Beta freeze.. > dnf reinstall > dnf distro-sync > dnf update-to Will start with these, thanks.
'dnf upgrade' is now an alias for 'dnf update', master commit 91a92b0, dnf-0.2.16.
'dnf reinstall' is now supported, master commit 5e0e09d, dnf-0.2.17.
> 'dnf reinstall' is now supported, master commit 5e0e09d, dnf-0.2.17. more like dnf-0.2.16
'dnf update-to' works since commit 7dced75, dnf-0.2.17.
'dnf distro-sync' (without package-limiting arguments) works as of commit d38b9b1, dnf-0.2.17.
bug 880303 deals with the DNF not recognizing commands' arguments as provides of a package.
bug 880524 finds some discrepancies between DNF and Yum regarding kernel multiversion handling.
Comparison of trying to install an existing package: 1) yum : $ sudo yum install stellarium Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit Package stellarium-0.11.4a-1.fc18.i686 already installed and latest version Nothing to do 2) dnf: $ sudo dnf install stellarium Setting up Install Process Resolving Dependencies --> Starting dependency resolution --> Finished dependency resolution Nothing to do dnf is not informing that package is installed and hence "nothing to do".
(In reply to comment #11) > Comparison of trying to install an existing package: > 1) yum : > $ sudo yum install stellarium > Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit > Package stellarium-0.11.4a-1.fc18.i686 already installed and latest version > Nothing to do > > 2) dnf: > $ sudo dnf install stellarium > Setting up Install Process > Resolving Dependencies > --> Starting dependency resolution > --> Finished dependency resolution > Nothing to do Hello Pratyush, would you mind opening a new bugzilla for this? This bug is meant to summarize the major differences mentioned in comment 0 and only depend on other, newly found and perhaps less severe bugzillas. Thanks, Ales
(In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #11) > > > would you mind opening a new bugzilla for this? This bug is meant to > summarize the major differences mentioned in comment 0 and only depend on > other, newly found and perhaps less severe bugzillas. Done. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882851
> dnf provides kernel (no output) fixed by commit d3d4e8d, dnf-0.2.18
excludes (bug 884617) now work (commit 28a29b4).
--skip-broken: the old yum behaviour that always tries to install the latest packages available can now be emulated in DNF with '--best' switch, bug 882211, commit 83d3338.
(In reply to comment #0) > dnf --disablerepo=fedora list yum (traceback for repo. APIs). > dnf --showduplicates list yum (traceback no .verGT API on packages). These work as of commit 29d3169.
libsolv-0.2.3-1.gitf663ca2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libsolv-0.2.3-1.gitf663ca2.fc18
(back to assigned, this has nothing to do with the latest libsolv)
Added a bug report that compares another yum and dnf functionality: dnf stops package install if "downloaded repomd.xml is older than what we have" https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904706
libsolv-0.2.3-1.gitf663ca2.fc18, hawkey-0.3.6-1.gitc8365fa.fc18, dnf-0.2.20-1.gitdec970f.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
dnf resolvedep has been dropped: http://akozumpl.github.com/dnf/cli_vs_yum.html#no-resolvedep-command
'dnf groups' and 'dnf group install <groupname>' work starting with dnf-0.3.4
Do dnf supports plugins that yum also supports?
(In reply to Parag from comment #24) > Do dnf supports plugins that yum also supports? no, there's planned plugins support but the plugins will have to be migrated.
Is there any documentation available on migrating existing plugins? Is there any DNF plugin available that I can see?
(In reply to Parag from comment #26) > Is there any documentation available on migrating existing plugins? Is there > any DNF plugin available that I can see? no and nobody is working on this yet.
(In reply to Parag from comment #26) > Is there any documentation available on migrating existing plugins? Is there > any DNF plugin available that I can see? https://github.com/akozumpl/dnf-plugins/blob/master/plugins/noroot.py There's no migration document yet but the API documentation is starting to take shape: http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/api_plugins.html
This message is a reminder that Fedora 18 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 18. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '18'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 18's end of life. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 18 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 18's end of life. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Hello, Maybe this was reported elsewhere, or it isn't the right place to do it (apologize if it is the case), but I noticed that dnf doesn't uses the includepkgs directive in repositories configuration files (.repo) as yum does. I must indicate that no other directive regarding including or excluding packages are in use in the repositories sections. For example, while using yum, if I add the following directive in a repository section: enabled=1 includepkgs=dnf yum only dnf and yum would be installed/updated/upgraded from that repository. The others packages from that repository wouldn't be taken in account. While using dnf, there seems that the includepkgs directive is ignored, and all the packages from that repository are taken in account. What I understood about this directive with yum, is that it includes only the list packages but not all the others, while the exclude directive includes all the packages but not the listed ones. Maybe I'm wrong. Anyway, I wanted to say that the speed that dnf is working is really impressive. As English isn't my native language, I hope my explanation was understandable (lots of include and exclude). Cordially, -- NVieville
Hi Nicolas, we don't support includepkgs in DNF yet, but if you report it as a special bug (you can just paste your comment 30 there) we will track the request and perhaps schedule fixing it. This current bug is only a tracking bug. Cheers, Ales
(In reply to Ales Kozumplik from comment #31) > Hi Nicolas, we don't support includepkgs in DNF yet, but if you report it as > a special bug (you can just paste your comment 30 there) we will track the > request and perhaps schedule fixing it. This current bug is only a tracking > bug. Thank you Ales for all this explanation. Sorry to not have understood that it was not the right place to report this request. As you suggest it, I opened a "special bug" wishing this feature here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055910 Hope this functionality will be present in dnf final release, because using mixed repositories is sometimes mandatory (some piece of software not present in official repositories) but could be a real difficulty to maintain. Any equivalent functionality will be fine too. Thanks again for your response. Cordially, -- NVieville
I think we can safely close this one---with all the work over the past two years on plugins, CLI, update paths, download and crypto features etc. DNF is at the compatibility level that we consider sufficient.
Hello, What is the DNF replacement for yum load-transaction? I see it is listed as missing in the first comment but I haven't found a DNF equivalent to it yet. I am talking about RHEL 8. Is there one? Thanks, Kitty