> >
> > yum check-update
>
> Is that the best you can come up with?
Given that it's the way specifically written into the program and
documentation for just this thing, I'd say yes.. it is the best.
>This is worthy of the scathing (butvague) criticism I saw earlier?
You didn't see it from Matt. You saw the proper documented method.
>Isn't this sorta like saying that "cat foo |
> grep NNN" is not nearly as good as "grep NNN foo" ? They appear largely
> equivalent, for all intents and purposes... the output even looks similar.
That's not a perfect analogy, but given the situation, it's pretty
good. Yes, the output looks the same, and most people won't notice or
care, but there's overhead and extra system work in getting the
answer. Scalability and performance over load where it counts is what
makes a good admin. It's the attention to detail and the drive to do
things the right way, not just the way that yeilds the proper answer.
> Hey, whatever floats your boat, I guess. I'm certainly not worried about my
> client's well-being because I used one over the other.
I'd like this to not end up in typical flame session, and you're
right.. your clients may not suffer from your way, but it's not the
'documented way'. This really is not meant to be personal, or an
attack, so try not to take it that way.
Your way is a hack, and is evidence of not reading the documentation.
It's a functional solution, but not the right one. There is a
difference.
If you're going to make something your profession, do it to the best
of your ability no matter what it is. Know the tools you use inside
and out. And always remember, you can bill the customer for the time
you spend reading the documentation if you don't immediately know the
right answer. If you don't believe me, ask a lawyer what they bill
for. Might help to have some cash handy just in case they bill you for
the answer.
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety''
Benjamin Franklin 1775
