On Mon, 2004-10-04 at 11:48, Matthias Saou wrote: > seth vidal wrote : > > > > Makes sense, but isn't incompatible with what I said : If the arch > > > isn't explicitly given, then exactarch could (should?) be considered. > > > Typically, if you "yum install" an installonlypkg for which exactarch > > > is true and for which an arch (to override) isn't given on the command > > > line, then yum should say that the latest version is already installed > > > even if there is a more recent package available which is of a > > > different arch, shouldn't it? I hope this is what you mean by fixing it > > > either way. > > > > What would exactarch compare to if nothing else was installed? > > Then wouldn't it just pick the best matching arch for the current system > and "start from there"? In my sense, exactarch is only an extra layer of > protection against incompatible upgrades of installed packages. In general, > if you install (and not upgrade) an incompatible package, it can't do much > harm and can easily be removed. > > > The right fix is to make sure the behavior is the same for yum 2.1.X as > > is yum 2.0.X > > Sure, but I don't know by heart what 2.0.x does in most situation, unlike > you I guess :-) > > > > Thanks for the quick answers, it's the first time I've been using 2.1.x > > > to upgrade a whole system on a fast (P4) computer, and it does feel > > > much faster than 2.0.x, unlike on my test PII 400 :-) > > > > Icon did some good work this last week to help that problem. In short, > > yum will parse the xml files and write out a pickle file (if it is run > > as root) then it will mark the pickle with a checksum > > So the next time you need to read in that metadata, if the time repodata > > hasn't changed it will just read in the pickle which is an order of > > magnitude faster than the xml read-in. > > Nifty! Is that already in 2.1.5 that you just released or will it go in > later on? It will go in later on. I didn't have as much time as I wanted this weekend to mess with it and patch it in. -sv
