similar to: dnf replacing yum?

On 05/25/2016 06:43 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 22:32 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: > >> Also, yum had associations which it was sad to lose. > > Perhaps the Fedora ("We love consulting all affected users") replacement > could be named MUD. > > Now we await the System-D controlling interface ;-) > > > > There was

On Thu, 26 May 2016 08:00, James Hogarth wrote: > On 26 May 2016 00:57, "SternData" wrote: >> On 05/25/2016 06:43 PM, Always Learning wrote: >>> On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 22:32 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: >>> >>>> Also, yum had associations which it was sad to lose. >>> >>> Perhaps the Fedora ("We love consulting all affected

On Thu, May 26, 2016 5:17 am, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 05/26/2016 04:31 AM, Yamaban wrote: >> On Thu, 26 May 2016 08:00, James Hogarth wrote: >>> On 26 May 2016 00:57, "SternData" wrote: >>>> On 05/25/2016 06:43 PM, Always Learning wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 22:32 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: >>>>>

On 9/7/2016 7:02 PM, Keith Keller wrote: >> Staying with excellent C6 until the end. > CentOS 7 is yum based, not dnf. "Always Learning" seems to have a distaste for anything new or different than what he already knows. -- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

On Thu, May 26, 2016 9:30 am, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 05/26/2016 08:45 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> >> On Thu, May 26, 2016 5:17 am, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> On 05/26/2016 04:31 AM, Yamaban wrote: >>>> On Thu, 26 May 2016 08:00, James Hogarth wrote: >>>>> On 26 May 2016 00:57, "SternData" wrote: >>>>>> On 05/25/2016

On 05/26/2016 04:31 AM, Yamaban wrote: > On Thu, 26 May 2016 08:00, James Hogarth wrote: >> On 26 May 2016 00:57, "SternData" wrote: >>> On 05/25/2016 06:43 PM, Always Learning wrote: >>>> On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 22:32 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: >>>> >>>>> Also, yum had associations which it was sad to lose. >>>>

On 26 May 2016 00:57, "SternData" <subscribed-lists at sterndata.com> wrote: > > On 05/25/2016 06:43 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 22:32 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: > > > >> Also, yum had associations which it was sad to lose. > > > > Perhaps the Fedora ("We love consulting all affected users")

On 05/26/2016 08:45 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 5:17 am, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> On 05/26/2016 04:31 AM, Yamaban wrote: >>> On Thu, 26 May 2016 08:00, James Hogarth wrote: >>>> On 26 May 2016 00:57, "SternData" wrote: >>>>> On 05/25/2016 06:43 PM, Always Learning wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 2016-05-25 at

Yah, jimc again. I still cannot figure out what is wrong with my dc. The problem began with being unable to log on from Windows boxes after a power hit. The initial symptoms were: 1) When I log in on a Windows machine, with an account that should have administrator permissions, I don't have said admin rights. 2) When I attempt to launch the Windows remote server tools, I can select the

I'm having trouble getting openldap through its initial setup. I created a /etc/openldap/slap.conf file with a default rootdn and rootpw, and they didn't seem to take effect. After much wailing and gnashing of teeth I found that if there is a config directory at /etc/openldap/slapd.d, it will ignore slapd.conf. I can't figure out how to translate slapd.conf into the (new?) standard

I've read through the archives and it looks like people are using ext3 with software RAID with at least some success. I just want to confirm that it works properly. If I convert my md RAID 0 to ext3, should I expect A) A fast journalled filesystem, or B) Wailing and gnashing of teeth My RAID currently does not use persistant superblocks, because I created it many moons ago under the old

I saw mention of dnf in a blog article about installing a package on CentOS. Further investigation revealed that Fedora is replacing yum with dnf, apparently a new and better yum. But it wasn't clear if dnf was a drop-in replacement or if some migration setup was required. Is it supposed to work with CentOS or do we ignore it until some future release?

On 04/27/16 13:21, Pouar wrote: > On 04/27/16 08:49, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: >> On 04/26/16 21:13, John R Pierce wrote: >>> On 4/26/2016 6:45 PM, Jack Bailey wrote: >>>> Today someone in a meeting claimed the Bourne shell is deprecated, >>>> one of the reasons being it supposedly has security issues. Well >>>> that's all news to me,

On 04/26/16 21:13, John R Pierce wrote: > On 4/26/2016 6:45 PM, Jack Bailey wrote: >> >> Today someone in a meeting claimed the Bourne shell is deprecated, >> one of the reasons being it supposedly has security issues. Well >> that's all news to me, and I cannot find anything online to >> corroborate the claim. Is this true, is it a bash vs. Bourne FUD, or

On Fri, 9 Sep 2016, Always Learning wrote: > > On Thu, 2016-09-08 at 23:22 +0100, J Martin Rushton wrote: > >> Under Fedora23 issuing a yum command gets you a warning, then it >> automatically runs the appropriate dnf command. > > Can you tell us the DNF for:- > > yum update > yum groupinstall > yum reinstall > yum erase DNF isn't used on CentOS.

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 at 15:39, Sergio Belkin <sebelk at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I was using yum for years on CentOS servers, and since a few years ago dnf >> on Fedora desktops. My question is: >> Is the same yum4 on CentOS 8 that dnf? What should I use? >> Thanks in advance >>

On Wed, 2016-09-07 at 23:40 +0000, Joseph L. Casale wrote: > > I think it should be called YUM. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DNF#Naming > DNF stands for Dandified yum. Since DNF is a tech preview > in Fedora 18 the Python module names can not be 'yum.*' as > that would clash with yum itself. In any single version of Centos there is only one YUM. Having

On 08/09/16 03:02, Keith Keller wrote: > On 2016-09-08, Always Learning <centos at u68.u22.net> wrote: >> >> In any single version of Centos there is only one YUM. Having multiple >> and incompatible versions of Yum in the same software release is >> bonkers. > > Fedora is the place to try out bonkers stuff. If RedHat is satisfied > with dnf then they

I discovered that 'dnf upgrade' doesn't actually upgrade to the latest versions of packages unless you also supply the '--best' flag. This also changes update -> upgrade, since apparently 'dnf update' is deprecated. --- customize/customize_run.ml | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/customize/customize_run.ml

Hello everybody, What is the status of the freeipa/sssd and samba conflicts in the repositories? I can not wrap my mind around that two big packages are not getting security updates anymore, because they are conflicting. I will go to FOSDEM in Belgium this year to figure out more, but I am considering moving my centos systems to rockylinux. Kind regards, Jelle de Jong On 12/16/22 16:59,