On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sat, 2005-12-10 at 06:25 +1030, n0dalus wrote:
For that matter, why should `yum clean packages` only clean packages
in enabled repos? The entire conversation could apply equally to all
the clean sub-commands. Just saying that 'all' is the combination of
all the other clean commands doesn't actually change the discussion in
any meaninful way.
Yum is doing just as much guess work by assuming the user doesn't want
disabled/removed repos to be cleaned. It has already been concluded in
the leading discussion that 'all' is simply an ambiguous word in this
case and that the documentation might benefit from improvements
reflecting this.
You are correct. Yum is guessing and guessing is prone to error. But,
since we are prone to error, we're going to error on the safe side, and
go after the enabled repos, rather than everything. This is the safer
option. This is the way it works.
Well, yum is not guessing (if a depsolver started *guessing* stuff we'd
all have pretty .. um, "interesting" systems at our hands ;), it's
behaving in a perfectly constant way, but not the way some of us expect.
And in fact it IS behaving contrary to the documentation:
yum clean packages
Eliminate any cached packages from the system. Note that
pack ages are not automatically deleted after they are
downloaded.
The wording "eliminate any cached packages" doesn't leave anything to
guesswork IMHO.
Absolutely nobody is stopping you from submitting patches for the
documentations. Seth has said nothing wrt to this. Instead of
discussing this indefinitely, do something productive?
Well, Seth has spoken on the topic and it seems that people have actually
found uses for this behavior. I'll update the manpage to refer to the fact
that the clean operations only operate on enabled repositories, end of
story, ok? Before this thread gets any more ridiculous than it already
is...
- Panu -
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
