Hi, it’s Nicola, from the DNF5 team, I would like to start a discussion on the enablement of DNF5 in Fedora 41 asking specifically the quality-team about requirements/blockers that should be addressed before the F41 deadline gets too close.
The Fedora 41 development is starting now, and we are committed to fulfill all the requirements to enable DNF5 in Fedora 41.
Therefore, I would like to inform the Fedora quality-team on how we track all the requirements and how we prioritize and plan. We use this GH milestone to track all the requirements. This milestone is periodically reviewed to fulfill the Fedora release requirements and align with team capacity.
If there are missing points that need to be discussed, this would be a great time for our team to start any topic.
Furthermore, If we could use this discussion as a brainstorm for planning or asking questions, and then we could pull out some GH tickets that would be ideal for us.
Does dnf update --refresh work? I think I heard it was not implemented?
I use this command all the time and if it is not in dnf5 then I need to know what I have to do to rewrite all my admin scripts that use its replacement.
I was using “dnf clean all && dnf upgrade” in place of “dnf upgrade --refresh”. That’s a wasteful sledgehammer way but worked. I’m glad to see dnf5 finally has refresh back.
The other things I want is “dnf provides <path>” or equivalent in dnf5 and for the old system-upgrade and offline-upgrade to be implemented
Hello Mark, the provides command is also already available.
The other things I want is “dnf provides ” or equivalent in dnf5 and for the old system-upgrade and offline-upgrade to be implemented
Our current priority is completing the system-upgrade functionality in DNF5, which should be ready upstream I believe in about two months. We already have a proof of concept implementation in place, and it is crucial for Fedora 41 as it facilitates system upgrades to the subsequent version.
Regarding offline upgrades, we are working on establishing a unified approach across all commands to enable storing and replaying any transaction offline. You can follow the progress here. Changes in this area are expected, mainly extending the existing feature set from DNF4.
Thanks for the update. I’ve seen the git activity and was going to ask when it would be available for testing. Once it hits I’ll be using DNF5 fulltime and reporting issues, if any.
Hi Nicola! It might seem interesting, but we (the Quality team) don’t seem to have too many DNF-specific criteria or test cases Rather, a lot of them are implied by testing a different tool that internally uses DNF. So for example we care about anaconda being able to perform an installation, or gnome-software being able to manipulate RPM packages. We don’t really say which particular calls or commands must work, just that those workflows must work overall. Does this make sense?
When it comes to test cases, these could be interesting to you (note that they currently target dnf4, so if there are any specific commands, we’ll update them to dnf5 syntax once needed):
On new F41 beta installs you can still use dnf4. As dnf5 not claims to be backward compatible. Both dnf4 & dnf5 are installed.
ilikelinux@fe41:/usr/bin$ ls -al dnf*
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 4 Aug 1 20:00 dnf -> dnf5
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 1986 Aug 14 20:00 dnf-3
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 5 Aug 14 20:00 dnf4 -> dnf-3
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 1482344 Aug 1 20:00 dnf5
If you want to use dnf as on Fedora 40 you could make an alias to dnf4.
I propose that you make an own topic, to ask if, coping the packages local and make them available, will be implemented in dnf5 as whe had with the plugnin in dnf4 and add the dnf5 tag.
A silly question. I always used sudo dnf up --ref -y. Now ref doesn’t exist anymore and i just change it to refresh. No problem but, is there any plan to reimplement it? Thanks for the great work you guys do.
PD: Does anyone from the team or the community plan to write an article in fedoramagazine about the new features that dnf5 brings? What configuration differences are there in etc/dnf/dnf.conf? Thanks
Rather, a lot of them are implied by testing a different tool that internally uses DNF. So for example we care about anaconda being able to perform an installation, or gnome-software being able to manipulate RPM packages. We don’t really say which particular calls or commands must work, just that those workflows must work overall. Does this make sense?