Hardcode protection of dnf5 package #906
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Doing it this way, rather than using a file in /etc/dnf/protected.d, means that DNF 4 will still be able to remove DNF 5. I think this is the ideal functionality: DNF 4 will be able to remove DNF 5 and vice-versa, but neither package manager will accidentally remove itself. Resolves https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221907.
This was referenced Sep 20, 2023
|
Related: rpm-software-management/libdnf#1621 |
|
the failing test is due to an unresolved issue with gh secrets. I tried to build it locally and installing it in a f38 container and it was fine, so I would approve this PR to |
inknos
approved these changes
Sep 21, 2023
Conan-Kudo
approved these changes
Sep 21, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
DNF 5, like DNF 4, should be marked as protected to prevent accidental removal.
Doing it this way, rather than using a file in /etc/dnf/protected.d, means that DNF 4 will still be able to remove DNF 5. I think this is the ideal functionality: DNF 4 will be able to remove DNF 5 and vice-versa, but neither package manager will accidentally remove itself.
Resolves https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221907 "dnf5 is not marked as protected, removal leaves system more or less bricked ".