On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Gordon Messmer <yinyang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Agreed, but those repositories don't have everything - by policy - and
>> everything can't be coordinated or tested together.
>
> That was not the case in this instance, and lacking an example of such
> an instance, there's no reason for you to continue this ranting thread.
I'll be done ranting when people understand that using 3rd party repos
very often causes trouble if you don't make manual configuration
entries to control them. And those manual configuration entries are
likely themselves to cause trouble. Which was the case.
>> Thus the
>> requirement for the manual configuration to attempt to control
>> updates
>
> No, there probably isn't any good reason to manually configure ELrepo as
> it was. Like EPEL, they don't put packages in their repository that are
> also featured in the base distribution.
Nobody said this configuration was right. I said it was enough of a
problem that that experienced admins get it wrong. You can't really
generalize about it because even with repos that have a policy of not
overwriting base packages you can conflict with other 3rd party repos
or even subsequently have one of those packages show up in base or one
from centos extras show up in epel. It is one of those thing that
bothers me because there should be a technical solution to getting
matching components together but there isn't for policy reasons.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
