On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Petr Stodulka pstodulk@redhat.com wrote:
On 18.8.2017 14:18, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 08:10:16 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 7:55 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 13:43:28 +0200, Petr Stodulka wrote:
Hi folks,
I found now that the setup rpm is removable from the system,
Clarify, please. What exactly have you found out? Have you found an update case where one of the package updater tools removed it actually?
$ rpm -q --whatrequires setup rpcbind-0.2.4-7.rc2.fc26.x86_64 shadow-utils-4.3.1-3.fc26.x86_64
# dnf remove setup
I am not talking about update, I am talking about situation that you can break completely your system by removing of packages, that should not be removable. The logic why someone would want to remove such packages it is not relevant here. You shouldn't be able to do that. That's the point.
Whatever you've done, you would need to remove more packages before you could remove "setup".
In case a tool like "dnf" has done it, I'd like to see the details, particularly the packages DNF used to replace setup and shadow-utils.
It doesn't replace it with anything, it just considers it okay to remove from the system, because we don't have any protected packages that depend on setup.
That doesn't make sense [yet]. It cannot remove it without breaking existing dependencies. It would need to remove shadow-utils, too, for example.
Obiously you are able to remove shadow-utils "without troubles" too. That's just point that the list of protected packages should be bigger. IMHO, packages that are crucial for basic run of the system shouldn't be removable.
Our basesystem package seems to be quite neglected.
For comparison, here's Mageia's basesystem: http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/basesystem/current/SPECS/basesyst...
We should probably consider filling out the basesystem package more and making it so that it is a protected package.
That package isn't supposed to get removed on a Fedora system anyway.