On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 16:34 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > It says a lot about the yum developpers state of mind that even a direct > quote from a well-accepted standard attracts this kind of response. The standards don't say squat about WHAT removes the cache. Yums cache is completely regeneratable, provided that the repository is still available. However the yum developers stance is that yum itself will not take the chance that the user really doesn't want that cache laying around, so it leaves it up to THE USER to clear disabled / removed repo cache. What is so hard about this to understand? > Guys, > if you don't want to listen to others, and have only abuse to offer, don't > answer questions at all. Why do you think every single yum thread is > degenerating lately ? Every single poster but you is brain-damaged ? The only 'abuse' I see is folks yelling at the yum developer because he refuses to implement a features he finds dangerous, and does not wish to get the tonnes of email when said dangerous feature actually does something the user didn't wish. The abuse comes after the developer says no, then the user gets all in a huff and starts throwing accusations around as well as names at times. Give me a friggin break. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
