On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 16:47 -0300, Rodrigo Barbosa wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 03:39:55PM -0400, William L. Maltby wrote: > > Now if we can be sure that Yum understands that .rf, .plus, ... are all > > the same packages, we're home free. But ... are they the same packages? > > This may be a dumb question, but can we be sure firefox from one repo is > > compatible with what a user runs? Kernel features differences, etc. For > > firefox, maybe the answer is yes. Does that apply generally to other > > packages too? Is the "unprotect" solution certain to be "generally > > applicable"? OTOH, that is a user administration problem, isn't it? > > Actually, that is a minor issue. RPM itself has the final vote on > who is the newest package. So YUM really should not worry about it. > At least, I hope YUM uses rpmVersionCompare. That leads me to another thought. Have we been seeing issues in which Yum has become a counter-productive solution? As with any tool, Yum was designed with a certain set of needs to be addressed and a certain set of condition in which it expected to operate. Are some of the answers given for "how to do it with Yum" really a disservice? Maybe some answers should be "Forget Yum for your situation, use RPM directly"? I only ask because we have all seen how easily we fall into the process of fitting a square peg into a round hole when all we needed to do was grab a round peg. > > - -- > Rodrigo Barbosa > <snip sig stuff> -- Bill
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
