Use up2date vs yum - why?

[Liloulinx]

Paul Howarth wrote:

> akonstam at trinity.edu wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 09:29:20AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
>>
>>> I use FC2, so the question is resolved for me. But I suppose
>>> I'll eventually go to a later version. While it was available
>>> for me, I used up2date, with the little icon on the "taskbar"
>>> (or whatever it's called in FC). I had no problems with it.
>>> In fact, it appears to be a GUI to yum.
>>>
>>> So, why do I see messages here promoting yum over up2date?
>>> IOW, what advantage does yum have for someone simply wanting
>>> to update his packages?
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>>
>> It is a matter of taste. Since you have discovered it is really the
>> same program I would choose the on that suits your temperament.
>
>
> up2date and yum are not the same program. At least, they weren't up 
> until FC4. In FC4, up2date calls python modules from yum to handle 
> repomd style sources (which are the default for FC4). The code for 
> handling other types of repos (e.g. RHN channels, apt, old-style yum 
> [pre FC4]) is entirely separate code.
>
> The best reason for using yum in FC4 is that it works more reliably 
> than up2date.
>
> Paul.
>

But I think that to upgrade from FC3 (or FC2) to FC4, 'yum upgrade' 
generate some problems.  'Up2date'  I think it doesn't have this problem 
(I haven't tested it yet!!!). What do you think about?
---
Liloulinx (http://freealilou/free.fr)

	

	
		
___________________________________________________________________________ 
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger 
Téléchargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com