On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 13:14 -0600, Greg Knaddison wrote:
> On 5/10/05, Lamar Owen <lowen@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > My complaint isn't as much with the repository as it's with yum itself for
> > blowing chunks and completely failing.
>
The problem isn't yum ... it is the 304 status code from apache
>
> You may have better luck discussing this on the yum-devel list. I
> know Seth reads this list, but not everyone working on yum does and I
> also know that Seth has been busy recently and may not ready every
> single post to CentOS.
>
> In fact, there is a discussion on this topic already:
>
> https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/yum-devel/2005-May/thread.html#1140
>
> Seth has responded with some reasons why simply noting that a repo is
> down and moving on isn't a good idea. I'm not familiar enough to say
> whether or not his reasoning makes sense, but I generally do respect
> his opinion.
I agree with Seth on this one ... if one repo doesn't work, you could
get software installed from a repo where you don't expect it to come
from. So I think it is perfectly reasonable to require manual
intervention if something is broken.
yum --disablerepo {reponame} update
(or install, upgrade, groupinstall)
works fine and will work for a temporary issue
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050510/ca5c24c5/attachment.bin
