Timothy Murphy wrote:
> I'm surprised there is not some simple way
> of informing the user that the repo is being updated.
> One would imagine the repodata could contain a message to that effect
> (with an estimate of how long it would take)
> which yum could read and repeat.
oldman wrote:
> Sure, that could be done! With the net effect of you trying to update
> again, which of course you should be smart enough to figure out without
> being told.
I understand that both the yum authors and the Fedora project are keen
that people should be able to host a repo mirror with nothing more than
a normal HTTP/FTP server, rsync (to get the files), space on a server
and a lot of bandwidth.
This makes it more likely that the various mirror sites around the world
actually carry Fedora repos (there's nothing that says they have to). It
also makes it much easier for sites to run their own on-site mirror.
Given that, there's no scope for intelligence at the repo end, it all
has to happen at the yum end. Probably yum should be better at retrying
automatically, and hiding the problems from the end-user.
James.
--
E-mail address: james | Mike Andrews' Corollary to Murphy's Law:
@westexe.demon.co.uk | In any sufficiently large collection of texts, every
| possible misspeeling, as well as some that are not
| possible, will occur.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
