I did the last major rewrite of the AdditionalRepos page, in large part because of issues we see repeatedly on the IRC channels. The repos placed in the "known problem" section are there for a good reason -- they replace base packages by default, or they're poorly maintained, leading to security issues. Or both.
Atomic falls squarely into the former category -- it replaces key parts of the base OS with its own packages, and it has broken yum on numerous occasions in the process. While fixable, for most inexperienced users this is difficult and the best way forward is a full reinstall.Any repo that does that, repeatedly, deserves to be placed in that section.
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 10:59 PM, PatrickD Garvey <patrickdgarveyt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Maybe I posted this a little late on Friday for anyone to take an interest in suggesting a properly built search URL for the current forum software, so I did some experiments which led to the suggestion added below the copy of the previous post.
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 6:52 PM, I wrote:> [https://www.centos.org/search.php?query=atomicorp&mid=30&action=""> forum search] returns a 404.>> Can the forum search https://www.centos.org/forums/search.php? be used with parameters that will provide the supporting material for the warning "Many CentOS users have had problems after enabling this repo"?
>My experimentation indicates this URL:
https://www.centos.org/forums/search.php?submit=Search&keywords=atomicorp+reporeturns 13 postings that discuss to use the Atomicorp repo with less than satisfactory results.Do those 13 postings adequately support the admonition to use the Atomicorp repo only with particular care?
_______________________________________________
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
_______________________________________________ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
