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

Re: yum clean bug

seth vidal wrote:
On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 23:19 +0100, Thomas M Steenholdt wrote:
seth vidal wrote:
why on earth do you think yum should do what it's been told NOT to do?

the clean functions, to me, represents a way to make yum clean out it's stored data - it really has nothing to do with whether or not a repo is enabled, because the clean commands has nothing to do with repo intervention as such. just cleans out the cache.

But how can I really be sure that ALL the data in that dir is
disposable, especially if the user has disabled the repo in question in
their config.

If the repo is disabled - it means that the user don't care about that repo. Besides cache is always disposable, it serves a purpose but when we ask yum to clean out the cache it should just do it. next operation might take a little longer, but we asked for it (perhaps we needed an additional gig of freespace) and we are not losing any functionality whatsoever.

(Wikipedia) In computer science, a *cache* is a collection of data *duplicating* original values stored elsewhere or computed earlier.

we can't possible loose any vital information from pretty much just "rm -rf"-ing /var/cache/yum/*. Still yum should be the one to take care of this, not rm.

you could add a noclean=1 option to exclude an existing repo from cleaning if you think that would serve any purpose at all. IMO that is not at all needed.

I err on the side of protecting data. If yum is not told to remove it,
then it won't remove it.

How do you want me to tell yum that I want to remote repo XYZ when it does not exist anymore.

A slightly different take is this - why do we want to waste space on cache for a repo that is disabled?

b/c the user didn't tell us to act on that repo.

That's why.

We told yum not to care about the repo - We did not tell yum to protect it.


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