[Yum] Issues trying to keep Fedora Core devel up-to-date with yum

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



[I'll follow the archive, but please Cc: me]

I've been trying to keep my Fedora Core devel installation automatically
up-to-date with a nightly "yum update" run from cron. This is proving
difficult. I'll list my issues (with a risk that some of them have been
dealt with previously on the mailing list - sorry):

 - Whenever yum detects it needs to update a .noarch package (such as 
   yum or hwbrowser), it tries to load it from s390x directory, not from
   i386, eg.

         .../fedora/linux/core/development//s390x/Fedora/RPMS/hwbrowser-0.15-2.noarch.rpm
   instead of
         .../fedora/linux/core/development//i386/Fedora/RPMS/hwbrowser-0.15-2.noarch.rpm

   This is a problem, since most of the mirrors do not carry s390x directory
   at all. Hence, everytime a .noarch package is not up-to-date, the whole
   "yum update" run fails.
 - If one of the packages to be updated fails the dependencies (eg.
   xmms-1.2.10 can't be upgraded since xmms-mp3 needs xmms-1.2.9 which
   is not available), the whole "yum update" fails. It would be nice if all
   the other packages would still be upgraded even if xmms needs to be 
   left unupdated. I realize this must have crossed yum developers' mind 
   and it's probably hard to do (judging from the time it takes to calculate
   the dependencies as is), but I can't help bringing it up.
 - When yum asks from 

     [update: gnome-desktop 2.5.91-1.i386]
     [update: libgnomeprint15 1:0.37-8.2.i386]
     Is this ok [y/N]: 

   it would be nice to see something like

     [update: gnome-desktop   2.5.90-1.i38    ==> 2.5.91-1.i386]
     [update: libgnomeprint15 1:0.37-8.1.i386 ==> 1:0.37-8.2.i386]
     Is this ok [y/N]: 

 - Another nice-to-have would be logging. When something breaks
   it would be nice to be able to check from the logs what package
   version was replaced and when. Perhaps this would be better
   in rpm.

I'm sorry about rehashing the obvious with the two latter points (feel free
to ignore them), but the first point (and perhaps the second) is a bug IMHO,
and it's been around quite while.


-- v --

v@xxxxxx

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Legacy List]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux