Given the header, at first, I thought this was spam, but then I saw who it was from so I realized it likely was legit. Then I thought it was a way to give money to yum developers, which I thought was a great idea. Then I realized it was really about a problem I've actually had! On 9/28/2004 6:43 AM, Robert G. Brown wrote: > The question I have for the list is twofold. First, is this really > desireable? While yum-arch obviously doesn't care where a directory is, > and while URL's can be as complex as one likes, wouldn't it help to have > a "style guide" suggesting a more or less standardized layout relative > to a (still arbitrary) toplevel path? I don't particularly care about this part, but I think a "best practice" is always good. I suspect that if the default yum.conf uses a particular style, it will be replicated. > Second, even if the list admins are curmudgeonly mavericks who want to > put things whereever they durn well please arr matey arr (as may well > be:-) is there any interest in having a $distribution variable? This very much interests me. I auto-generate my yum.conf files, and it's a hassle to not have the distribution available at run-time as a substition variable. I currently have to know whether the client I'm generating for is Fedora or RedHat so I can generate the correct file. If $distrubution were available, all of the files would be identical. > Is > there any way to consistently set it to a set of standard values that > work for at least the primary distros that use yum? For example, > parsing the first line of /etc/issue would work for RH and Fedora, but > there may a better way or a different way. This I'm not sure of. My work is restricted to RH and Fedora. Eric.
