Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 08:03 -0400, Fabio Jara wrote:
I hope Tim (ignored_mailbox) will not see your advice. He recently
was
very angry about yum clean all. Now it's forbidden to give such
advice
;-)
Why is that? that worked for me two times in a row now, why is it
forbidden? O_o For future reference.
The only reason to use "yum clean all" instead of "yum clean metadata"
is if you're running out of space because of cached packages. Then you
get to waste bandwidth (not to mention server resources) downloading
them again.
"yum clean metadata" has solved every problem I've ever had that "yum
clean all" would have solved. I would be interested to hear *reasoned*
argument about why this might not always be the case (apart from the
disk space issue already mentioned).
I have a single /var/cache/yum filesystem on NFS which allows me to not only
save disk and bandwidth, but to speed updates considerably. I'm sure using it
from more than one machine at a time could cause a problem, but it is a useful
stopgap here. It avoids having a mirror of everything, while pulling down each
rpm only once, and only those actually used here.
The ideal solution would take care of this, but with only two admins doing
updates manual sync works for us. I had a tool to do a more perfect job of
contention control, but it proved to be overkill.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
