Re: Setting 'installonlypkgs' from the repository?

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

 



On 6/19/07, Brian Long <brilong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 17:09 +0200, Tarjei Knapstad wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to figure out if it's possible to force packages to be
> "installonly" from the repository or if I have to make sure that every
> user has a correct "installonlypkgs=" directive in their .repo file.
>
> I found a python script in the archives for listing which packages are
> installonly, and on my Fedora 7 system this defaults to the kernel
> packages. Yet, the kmod-nvidia package from Livna for instance seems
> to be installonly as well (I've got two of these installed matching my
> kernels), and there is no installonlypkg directive in the livna.repo
> file. I also couldn't find anything in the livna repodata dictating
> that the kmod-nvidia package should be installonly.
>
> How does this work? Does the kmod-nvidia package become installonly
> because it requires another package that is installonly (the kernel)?

Tarjei,

If you look closely at the name of the kmod-nvidia package, that's not
the full name.  The full name on each one is distinct and it matches the
kernel version to which it is tied.

It is not being set to installonly from the repo and to my knowledge,
there is not a way to do this.


Hi Brian,

Hmm, I don't see what you mean... (maybe I'm being dense)

If I do a rpm -qi kmod-nvidia I get two entries:

Name        : kmod-nvidia                  Relocations: (not relocatable)
Version     : 100.14.09                         Vendor: rpm.livna.org
Release     : 1.2.6.21_1.3194.fc7           Build Date: Sun 10 Jun 2007 06:06:32

Name        : kmod-nvidia                  Relocations: (not relocatable)
Version     : 100.14.09                         Vendor: rpm.livna.org
Release     : 1.2.6.21_1.3228.fc7           Build Date: Thu 14 Jun 2007 01:03:19

Same name, same version, different releases, the second one installed
instead of updated after a 'yum update'...

Thanks for the info about the repo part, guess I'll just have to add a
'my-release.noarch' rpm containing the .repo files to keep things the
way they should be (hopefully).

Cheers,
--
Tarjei
_______________________________________________
Yum mailing list
Yum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum

[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