Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
More to the point, how can I expect this to work after the thing I want goes
away in the repository, replaced by a mistaken push of something broken? I
think it is unreasonable to assume that such mistakes will never happen.
What's the plan to avoid/recover from this?
You keep mixing up different questions. There are different questions
1) How do you know its broken?
... still waiting for you to even explain how you know something is
broken before you install it.
That wasn't a question. I'll figure out how to test for brokenness
after you tell me how to reproduce exact tested, non-broken states. Or
maybe I'll watch the mail list for subjects like 'sucking' or "dbus
disaster" before doing any updates.
2) Once you know its broken how prevent it from going on to a client system
.... yum's configuration options work just fine for that.
No, I have to know a lot more than "it's broken" to do anything with a
yum configurations. What I'd rather do is find an "it works", tested
set and duplicate that and only that.
3) If you found out its broken after you installed it on a client
system how do you revert to a previous update?
... you keep a local cache of previously installed updates. yum lets
you keep a local cache..per client. The caching is off by default but
it can be turned on.
Is that really the plan you expect users to follow? Has anyone even
tried that to see if it works in the general case?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
