On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, seth vidal wrote:
> > which will be used to schedule the actual install/upgrade. A
> > missing dependency would be a 'failure'.
>
> so let me make sure I understand what this entails:
>
> you need to run yum with a '--what would you do if' parameter - and if
> it say what things it would need to do to update. Is that right?
yes -- but in
https://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91
I was also going to use it as an 'install' tool assistant as
well. I don't think it matters to the code paths that it is
an install, but I thought I should mention it, just in case.
> I was looking at the yum download-only patches and the one thing I don't
> like is they all seem like overkill.
smile -- I was admiring Miguel's proposed patch; to my eye, it
looks like it is about as small as adding the 'retrieve' or
'downloadonly' can be made -- but I am always willing to learn
;)
> What if there was a more-simple yum download-only mechanism
> [... as ... ] a second, optional, y/n check AFTER the
> packages were downloaded.
<snip>
> If it was done that way it's:
> 1. a trivial amount of code
> 2. not just a download-only mechanism but an easy way for people to be
> MORE careful about installs.
> Thoughts?
This redefinition through a non-default option works for me as
an approach. I can work with that.
-- Russ Herrold
