Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make protected_packages an append options #1110

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 18, 2024

Conversation

j-mracek
Copy link
Contributor

@j-mracek j-mracek commented Dec 18, 2023

It will allow to use configuration overrides from /usr for protected packages.

Resolves: #1107

CI: rpm-software-management/ci-dnf-stack#1431

Conan-Kudo
Conan-Kudo previously approved these changes Jan 4, 2024
@Conan-Kudo Conan-Kudo dismissed their stale review January 4, 2024 19:20

wrong PR

It will allow to use configuration overrides from /usr for protected
packages.

Resolves: rpm-software-management#1107
@@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ repository configuration file should aside from repo ID consists of baseurl, met
``protected_packages``
:ref:`list <list-label>`

List of packages that DNF5 should never completely remove.
This append list option contains name of packages that DNF5 should never completely remove.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"names"

Copy link

@keszybz keszybz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I can't comment on the details of the C++ code, but at the high level, this looks like it should do the right thing.

@Conan-Kudo
Copy link
Member

@j-mracek should I merge the CI PR first and re-run this? Or merge this and then the CI PR?

@Conan-Kudo Conan-Kudo self-assigned this Jan 9, 2024
@j-mracek
Copy link
Contributor Author

j-mracek commented Jan 9, 2024

@Conan-Kudo I have to fix a typo first.

Our CI is broken, therefore we have to run all tests locally. Download ci-dnf-stack project build or download packages with patch to rpms directory. Then run ./container-test build --base fedora:38 && ./container-test run --command=dnf5 --tag dnf5, where fedora:38 should be modify according to rpms with the patch.

The set of protected packages might differ between systems therefore it
would be good to use a relevant set for the current location.
@kontura kontura assigned kontura and unassigned kontura Jan 18, 2024
Copy link
Member

@evan-goode evan-goode left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, thanks!

@evan-goode evan-goode added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 18, 2024
Merged via the queue into rpm-software-management:main with commit 0b57dd0 Jan 18, 2024
5 of 9 checks passed
yuwata pushed a commit to yuwata/systemd-fedora that referenced this pull request Oct 14, 2024
uapi-group/specifications#76

Actually, add a new file under /usr, but keep the old file in /etc
because it's still needed for dnf. The new file in the new location
is useful because it means that we get the correct behaviour even when
/etc is emptied (on systems with new dnf version).

dnf5 reads the new location:
rpm-software-management/dnf5#1107
rpm-software-management/dnf5#1110
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

RFE: allow listing protected packages under /usr
5 participants