On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 9:18 AM, Satish Eerpini <eerpini@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi David, > that was a good sugestion, but won't the list get too long if packages > were differentiated on that basis, is there no other way these > packages could be handled ??? This is really bordering on the path of insanity, as there is no sane method within rpm for rollbacks. How are you going to handle %pre or %postinstall scripts which may make multiple system modifications (think jpackage.org with the handling of /etc/alternatives)? How are you going to handle multiple distributions, or even multiple packagers, building the same packages with different names (clamav is a good example here). There are also complexities with multi-arch to consider. What happens if you have say mysql.i386 installed, as well as mysql.x86_64. You roll only one back, and now you've truly gone and screwed yourself. Just how many lists can be maintained for a rollback feature. Yes, rollbacks are a 'nice' feature to have, but attempting to pound this into yum, when the underlying platform has no method to handle it is REALLY not a good idea. I for one don't want to see this as a module, or as a part of yum proper. Some things just require an admin to test prior to implementation. This seems to be a good idea, but a poor replacement for proper testing and backups. -- During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell _______________________________________________ Yum mailing list Yum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum
