On Tue, 2006-09-05 at 11:25 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > A couple of other questions now: can I expect > > the versionlock to work 'backwards'? That is, if the testing > > turned out to be optimistic, could I back down to the previous > > packages by using the list from the prior CVS commit (assuming > > the repositories still held the old files, of course)? > > I would think it would have a problem with this, as it would need to > remove the newer package and install the older one (at least I can't > easily make yum replace a newer pacakge with an older one). So, I don't > know if the plugin would do that. > > Things like this would also require all RPMS to be in the repo and > maintained forever. Forever - or at least until you notice that the new update you just applied is broken - so forever or the next day, whichever comes first... > You mentioned C3, where there are no yum plugins as well. > We are working on a yum-2.4.x for centos3 ... however it is not ready > yet. The version of yum in Centos 3.x includes the --download-only option as a built in. And so far Centos3 has not had any updates that I would have wanted to back out or needed to hold back. The only thing even resembling a glitch was a long time ago when the ifup/down scripts started observing the HWADDR settings for interfaces which could have been a problem on the machines where the disks were pre-configured and shipped to remote sites for installation if I hadn't caught it before too many updates. So thanks for helping with the bleeding-edge avoidance on that front. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
