Bug 955673 - [rfe] protected_packages feature in dnf
Summary: [rfe] protected_packages feature in dnf
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: dnf
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ales Kozumplik
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2013-04-23 13:58 UTC by Rahul Sundaram
Modified: 2014-09-30 23:41 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2013-04-24 08:19:34 UTC
Type: Bug

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Rahul Sundaram 2013-04-23 13:58:29 UTC
Description of problem:

yum has a protected_packages feature that disables the ability to remove yum with yum itself by default but dnf seems to lack it.  dnf remove dnf works fine and i haven't tried dnf remove yum but suspect it might work as well.

Comment 1 Ales Kozumplik 2013-04-24 06:24:49 UTC
I don't consider this a systematic Yum feature and so don't plan to support this in DNF. If you want to do 'dnf remove dnf' then by all means do it.

Thanks for the report anyway, this yum/dnf incompatibility should be documented.

Comment 2 Ales Kozumplik 2013-04-24 08:19:34 UTC
Documentation added in d0224a5:


closing as NOTABUG.

Comment 3 Panu Matilainen 2014-01-03 07:29:52 UTC
I think the protected packages as a *mechanism* is a highly useful one and should be kept around, one way or the other (see below). However *populating* the data is an entirely different matter - for example figuring the mapping between currently running kernel and some installed package is a very distro-specific thing and is best left to a distro-specific plugin.

It'd be possible to implement rpm-level enforcement for install/erase/upgrade/obsolete prevention mechanism, settable on per-package basis (inherited across upgrades I suppose, maybe even obsoletes). James wasn't thrilled wrt such a thing for yum as it already had its own mechanism at the time this option came up, but perhaps here would be a chance to rethink the situation. Note that rpm would also only provide a mechanism, not policy.

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