Use dnf instead of rpm #886
Conversation
|
/test precommit-check |
bshephar
force-pushed
the
dnf-instead-of-rpm
branch
from
d9fc3ff to
913cead
Compare
|
/test precommit-check |
| @@ -34,10 +34,9 @@ Repeat this step for each data plane node that the hotfix must be applied to. | |||
| + | |||
| ---- | |||
| $ ssh <ssh_user>@<data_plane_node> | |||
| $ sudo rpm -F /tmp/<hotfix_id>/rpms/*.rpm | |||
| $ sudo dnf in -y /tmp/<hotfix_id>/rpms/*.rpm | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is there a specific reason why? are you expecting hotfix rpms to need to be able to resolve deps and perhaps install other updates? It seems to me that would be something we would not want to do. I'm pretty sure we have documented using rpm in past releases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It just aligns with RHEL documented processes for installing and managing packages. AFAIK there's no RHEL recommendations to use rpm commands directly. I think it's probably less confusing for users if we align our recommendations with those used in RHEL documentation.
If there are dependencies, they should probably be installed right? Would we expect that an RPM with dependencies would even work if the dependencies were to be skipped?
The main objective was to align with recommendations for RHEL. But if we feel there's a compelling case to not do that, we can drop this PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that this rationale for the change is valid. After all, the entire move to asciidocs was performed to harmonize docs across RH products. It makes sense to continue in that direction.
That being said, in the interest of clarity and for posterity, it may be better to explicitly state this in the commit message.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The main objective was to align with recommendations for RHEL. But if we feel there's a compelling case to not do that, we can drop this PR.
I think that explains it, so I'm ok with it. Are there downstream CI considerations that need to be updated as well, or was this all manually tested?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Manually tested with a random RPM. As far as I'm aware, there's currently no downstream jobs that test this process yet.
This change updates the hotfix docs to use the dnf command instead of rpm directly Signed-off-by: Brendan Shephard <[email protected]>
bshephar
force-pushed
the
dnf-instead-of-rpm
branch
from
e88888f to
354a6ea
Compare
|
LGTM unless someone has reservations. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: bshephar, slagle The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-merge-bot
bot
merged commit a74da16
into
openstack-k8s-operators:main
This change updates the hotfix docs to use the dnf command instead of rpm directly