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 Fri, 2005-09-09 at 08:32, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 08:54 -0400, William Hooper wrote:
>>
>>> Rsync only imposes that load the once or twice a month you sync, not
>>> every time a machine does a "yum update".
>>
>> Exactly!  He seems to also fail to understand that there is a
>> significant "cost savings" for _all_ parties to rsync the YUM repository.
>>
>
> The only reason there is even a possible savings is that yum circumvents
> standard http/ftp caching practices by randomizing the source locations.

We've been through this before.  Yum only changes servers if you use the
mirror list option.  By default CentOS (at least 4) doesn't, so what is
the problem?

> Even then, you'd have to update a vast number of server-type machines to
> make up for the fact that rsync'ing the repository is going to pull copies
> of updates for a gazillion programs that no machine has installed.

So don't rsync it.  Pull the RPMs from your test machine's yum cache and
make your own repo.

-- 
William Hooper