On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 03:21:37PM -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
I agree with that and the kernel removal behavior isn't the only difference. I mean, how often would one run dnf remove glibc on purpose and the significant amount of accidental runs of yum that caused serious problems resulted in yum developers adding some protection against removing key packages. dnf changing this expected behavior is problem and clearly this is a design decision which I think needs to revisited. http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/cli_vs_yum.html#protected-packages-is-ignored
This one is clearly one of those "doomed to repeat history" things in motion.
Protected packages was first implemented * as a yum plugin because Seth thought it was kind of crazy and shouldn't be core functionality, but then it proved itself in real use and became built-in. Now, the DNF pages says "Similar functionality can be implemented by a plugin", putting us right back where we were. **
* originally as a feature for BU Linux :) ** well, except that I don't have an intern interested in writing the plugin this time around. Volunteers welcome!