#2679 F36 Change: Retired Packages
Closed: Accepted 2 months ago by zbyszek. Opened 3 months ago by bcotton.

Easy the task of removing packages, which were retired and no longer receives updates.


After a week, there are no votes. Waiting for votes.

I have no issues with the addition of this script, neither with mentioning it in https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/#sect-optional-post-upgrade-tasks

+1

(Personally, I don't think it is extremely helpful, but I see no issues with explicitly mentioning it there.)

With a vote of (+3,0,-0), this is approved by policy.

Metadata Update from @bcotton:
- Issue tagged with: pending announcement

3 months ago

In the program output: "but this packages will not get any updates." → "but these packages will not get any updates", "Gather package list for Fedora 34" → "Gathering package list for Fedora 34…".

In the program: I think you should catch when dnf is terminated by ^C and abort the script too. Right now it's very hard to exit from the script.

In the change page:

We make sure that archaic packages do not break upgrade between two versions of Fedora.

This is only partially true. We have fedora-obsolete-packages to handle this, so for upgrades N→N+1 and N→N+2 this is not necessary. But for upgrades with a jump of more than 2, it would indeed help. FWIW, I think we should just keep more versions in fedora-obsolete-packages, so that such upgrades go more smoothly. But even with that, not all packages are listed in f-o-p, so this script would still be useful.

I'll add my +1. Similarly to @churchyard, I don't think this script is widely applicable, and I would love to see more upgrade stuff being handled automatically, without user input, but there are scenarios where it is useful.

EDIT: "those" → "these"

Metadata Update from @zbyszek:
- Issue untagged with: pending announcement
- Issue close_status updated to: Accepted
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

2 months ago

Grammar suggestions edited.

In the change page:

We make sure that archaic packages do not break upgrade between two versions of Fedora.

This is only partially true. We have fedora-obsolete-packages to handle this, so for upgrades N→N+1 and N→N+2 this is not necessary. But for upgrades with a jump of more than 2, it would indeed help. FWIW, I think we should just keep more versions in fedora-obsolete-packages, so that such upgrades go more smoothly. But even with that, not all packages are listed in f-o-p, so this script would still be useful.

I do not agree. fedora-obsolete-packages only add package if it causes problems and it comes from N-1 or N-2 Fedora. If the package does not cause a problem and you do several upgrades and then it causes an issue during the upgrade from N+3 -> N+4 then the user have a problem and fedora-obsolete-packages will not help.

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata