Re: Why is yum not liked by some? -- CVS analogy (and why you're not getting it)

[whooperhsd3 at earthlink.net (William Hooper)]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-09-08 at 17:37, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
[snip]
>> 1.  The repository to have every single package -- be it
>> packages as whole, or some binary delta'ing between RPMs (if possible)
>
> It just needs to  keep every package that it has ever had - at
> least as long as it might be useful for someone to install them. That seems
> to be the case now.

I don't know of any repo that keeps all packages ever released.  CentOS
moves them out of the repo so everyone doesn't have to mirror them. 
Fedora Core completely removes old packages (I have the rsync deletes to
prove it).  I only see the newest versions in Dags repo.

And again, I ask, who decides if it is "useful for someone to install
them"?  If the CentOS maintainers didn't feel the new packages were ready,
they wouldn't release them.

> Sorry, I just don't buy the concept that rsync'ing a whole
> repository is an efficient way to keep track of the timestamps on a few
> updates so you can repeat them later.  Rsync imposes precisely that big
> load on the server side that you wanted to avoid having everyone do.

Rsync only imposes that load the once or twice a month you sync, not every
time a machine does a "yum update".

As I've said before, if you have your test machines pointed at the
official mirrors, you have the RPMs you need and can just copy them into
your repo and run createrepo, no rsync needed.

-- 
William Hooper