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

Re: yum vs. up2date

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Mike WItt wrote:

> I've been experimenting with yum and up2date. They both appear to
> have their merits. I've got a couple of additional questions.
> (1) Is it "safe" to use both yum and up2date? 


>     It *appears* that
>     one recognizes changes that were made by the other. Is this
>     always the case? 

Because both use 'rpmdb' to identify the current state of the
sytem. (the current state could have been arived at by use of
rpm/yum/up2date/apt/other-means previously)

>     Or can you get in trouble if you don't stick
>     to one or the other?

I don't think so.

> (2) What is the best way to go about finding the "right" repositories
>     to use? Both in terms of getting the "correct" updates, and also
>     in terms of not generating undue traffic?

The way I do this (with yum) is:

- /etc/yum.conf is the main config - which includes repositories which
  I ALWAYS want to use. (fc1-release,fc1-updates,fc1-extras)

  Now I can do 'yum update' all the time.

- I have separate configs for additional repositories - which I tend
to use occasionally - and look for only specific packages. (for eg: I
don't want all updates from 'dag' (like rsync - which might overwrite
fedora-release versions - just a couple of extra pacakges like pine). 
So I have /etc/yum.conf.dag with (fc1-release,fc1-updates,fc1-extras,fc1-dag)

Now I can do 'yum -c /etc/yum.conf.dag update pine'

yum-2.1 - which comes with FC3 (beta) has a better way to manage this
(so I don't have to repeat fc1-release in both /etc/yum.conf &


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