Update and enable tests for transaction replay #1525
Conversation
It checks different but very related things but it is much more readable and understandable.
…action "last" are` It removes last uses of the old step and removes it.
- replacing actions were merged into `Replaced` - `removed` was changed just to `Remove`
- The `replay` command is no longer a subcommand of `history` command - The `replay` command now accepts a directory instead of a single file - serialized transaction version bumped to `1.0` - environments no longer contain environment groups - groups no longer contain group packages - group actions now require a `reason` - updated error messages
Reasons are stored in system state and non-installed packages are not in system state. This means that for dnf5 its not valid to change reason of non-installed pkg. Even if the package is being installed, we cannot change the reason at the same time (such a transaction has to be created manually).
They are removed as unused dependencies.
We could use Group but some group would have to be installed: this is simpler and it doesn't matter for the purposes of the test.
This must have been broken in dnf4, probably beacuse all installonly packages have just one reason.
I am not really sure what was the purpose of the `unknown` reason but dnf5 doesn't support it. There is reason `None` but package installed by dnf5 cannot have reason `None`.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for all the patches!
Based on the comment in rpm-software-management/dnf5#1569 regarding the missing package_types in the json format, I think it would be good to have a test for that as well (either test that it's a required field or test that a default value is used).
| # This should fail or there should be at least a warning. | ||
| # Reported as https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/issues/1573 | ||
| @xfail |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was a bit confused by this, because the xfail tests are usually written according to the expected behavior, but here there is the undesired (though currently working) behavior. Based on the discussion in the issue, I think dnf should report an error. Do I understand it correctly? If so, can you please change the expected outcome?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, sure, updated.
Removes a bunch of tests because the new 1.0 format doesn't store group packages and environment groups.
That is a good idea. |
Requires: rpm-software-management/dnf5#1569