Petr Pisar

I confirm this issue. rpm added it, among other architectures, in . Comparing rpm's macros.in, DNF5 is missing: x86_64_v2, x86_64_v3, x86_64_v4, em64t.

I confirm the bug. --advisory-severities option is document as "limit…", but it does not do an intersection: ~~~~ # dnf5 advisory list --security --advisory-severities=critical Updating and loading repositories: Repositories loaded....

Both commands should behave the same. I'm for changing it to an intersection because users who want an union can use the options in separate calls. Contrary with the union...

I will repeat myself, I like the new behavior more. > What about to only modify applying and operator between type and severity? Does severity exists in non-security advisories?

I don't get from your screen shot what's wrong. That your press ^C and the prompt does not appear? Then you have to press Enter or another ^C to get...

By the way, what DNF5 do you use? I have dnf5-5.1.2-20230828004523.30.ge2aa5eea.fc40.x86_64 and in a bash in screen in xterm I get the prompt: ~~~~ root@fedora-40:~ # dnf5 upgrade Updating and...

I thought that the white bar on your screenshot was a blinking cursor. And the later screenshot was performed when the cursors was in dimmed part of of the blinking...

I did not find any signal handler in DNF5. The only place where the cursors is restored is in in MultiProgressBar destructor. Does C++ unwind frames on terminating signals? Or...

The differences are on purpose: For automatic.conf location see 5b9325000cf5f65ba67e6b7a5670f7a33826e8a6. For sysmted files, see 5b81769b799036aecfd869204bf2b1ef2f072dd9. Do you have any functional problems with the new layout?

I will assume there is no functional problem. I will change this issue into a request to document the difference between DNF4 and DNF5 in doc/changes.rst.