[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: yum plugin suggestion or yum change?

On 12/5/05, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram redhat com> wrote:
>This probably should be written as a yum plugin for those working on
>repositories that can break like development tree.


> Those are regressions that are far less acceptable than the development
> tree breakages.

And yet it frequently happens with the GFS related kernel module
packages. Security kernel fixes which go directly into
updates-released inevitable cause the GFS and related kernel module
packages to be out of sync in updates-released. Sometimes for days at
a stretch.  I don't think anyone's bothered to file this since the
last kernel update(even the people I've seen complaining over the last
week because they did an everything install)

I think a plugin that targets rawhide or similar perpetually broken
repos is a foolhardy goal. Rawhide users should not be cuddled with
convience tools that help them ignore errors. It's a rawhide users job
to sort out the errors and determine if what they are seeing is worth
reporting.  The original poster's argument was about relying on
automated updates to get security updates, an argument that can't hold
for rawhide since rawhide explictly insecure.

The argument the original poster made about best security practices
with regard to automated updates may hold some weight but I counter it
with this.  Should automated nightly updates be relied on?  Is this
something Fedora wants to encourage people to do based on security
best practises?  I certaintly don't automate updates unless I have
tested the update process on a single system. I then have other
similiar local systems auto update from a local repository.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]