> Any change can break things, even if it is intended as a bug/security > fix, and there are some machines where you really want someone else > to do the testing first. I've always thought that yum should have > an option to ignore anything newer than a specified timestamp just > to make updates repeatable across a set of machines, but it is > another good point that you may just want to be sure you have a few > days to watch for problems that others mention on the mailing list > before updating a critical server. I think the only way to have that > kind of control now is to mirror a complete copy of all the repositories > you use locally so they can age a bit. Very true, however anyone using 'bleeding edge' and 'critical server' in the same sentence needs to take a very close look at their concept of reality and compare it to the rest of the population. Any critical system should have testing done on a dev/test environment before production. That's admin 101 stuff however and I don't feel that it's appropriate for software to decide. At most I see this being a yum plugin for desktop/hardcore perpetual testers. My personal opinion is that it has no place in yum proper. -- During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell
