Why is yum not liked by some?

[lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell)]

On Thu, 2005-09-08 at 13:07, Johnny Hughes wrote:

> So, seriously, the best thing would be for you to create a directory
> that contains all your RPMS ... you put only the ones that you have
> approved in there.  (You do not need to build anything from SRPMS).  You
> make that accessible from the web and run createrepo on it.

OK, but I basically want to include all official updates here but
I just want to delay/control rolling them out to make sure there
are no surprises.  That means I need to copy that whole repository
(of a size you said was such a problem mirroring that you had
to break it at the point releases) and repeat the copy for every
state where I might want repeatable updates or I have to track
every change.  I do realize that both of these options are possible,
I just don't see why anyone considers them desirable.  Compare it
to how you get a set of consistent updates from a cvs repository
where someone has tagged the 'known good' states as the changes
were added.

> You only put authorized RPMS in there, and you rerun createrepo every
> time you put a new RPM in there.

Normally I'll want to mirror the official repository to get the
set for testing.  How do I know when you are finished doing your
updates so that I don't get an rpm with a dependency that you
haven't copied in yet?  Or if I'm mirroring some other mirror,
how do I know their full set is consistent?   I hit problems like
that using yum directly - what will be different if I make a
snapshot at the wrong time?

> You run auto YUM updates on your machines, pointing to your repo, where
> you only put the RPMS that you are happy with.

That's the 2nd step.  I don't know I'm happy with them until I've
applied them, so this copy has to co-exist with other copies and
have separate versions for x86/x86_64, etc.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx