On Sun, 15 Feb 2004, seth vidal wrote: > On Sun, 2004-02-15 at 20:34 +0100, Jean Francois Martinez wrote: > > > Yum has for now two serious shortcomings > > > > 1) It has no browser, even a curses based one. You cannot, like > > with apt or urpmi, browse what is available, select what you are > > interested in and have it installed Depends on your pov. I consider it a feature. :-) > > 2) It does not deal with removable media. Unlike what happens > > with apt or urpmi it will not prompt you for the CD containing > > what you need. End result is that, since I have ADSL I often > > end downloading packages I have on CD but no heart for going > > through the ordeal of hunting dependencies on three CDs.. > > Copying everything on hard > > disk is a possibility but there are still plenty of boxes with > > 5 to 10 G disks where using 20% or more of disk space for keeping > > packages is not an option. And plenty of people who have huge disks > > (80g or more) and who are psychologically disturbed about keeping whole > > distros on disk. > > some thought has been given to this, in fact. If you'd like for this to > happen I think the best way would be the ability to tag a repository as > containing removable media (automatic detection of removable media is > not going to happen). > I'd suggest a repository-specific tag of removable=yes or no would be > the easiest way. Might be nice to have but it is for sure not a big deal. These days "disk is cheap" in spite of some people's psychological problems. :-) > > The problem of the huge download of headers is a PITA who only happens > > once. The two problems I mentioned happen every day. > > and curiously enough this problem is going away, as are the headers. and more curiously have you given any thought as to how you are going to do the transition?? Is it going to be a "Cold Turkey" kind of thing or will yum still support the both schemes for some period of time? Is this a yum-3 thing? Tom
