On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 17:28, Christopher C. Weis wrote: > 2) The ability to download, but not install, RPMs, using Yum. To throw my $0.02 out there for the heck of it. I think this is an option that has very little use. FTP clients, web browsers, and mirroring programs all exist for a reason. I have yet to see a convincingly good reason as to why a package updater should replicate this functionality. I've heard a few reasons, and all of them seem ... questionable, at least to me. Here's the sample of the ones I remember: 1) "I want to evaluate the package before I install it" -- I fail to see how having a binary package can help with that. Downloading the src.rpm and diffing the contents, sure. But not the binary RPM. Changelogs don't nearly have the information you want here. 2) "I want to test it on another box first" -- Why not use yum on the other box and download it and test it there. 3) "I don't trust the code which installs packages" -- Then stop using it. 4) "Other programs that update packages have it" -- Some of them have also corrupted rpmdbs in the past, that doesn't mean it's a good idea ;) Cheers, Jeremy
