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

Re: rawhide report: 20060121 changes

On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 08:44 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> This is all well and dandy for traditional base + updates systems, it's
> an assumption that's dead wrong for rolling releases like rawhide.
> This thread as shown nothing @rh checks rawhide iterations are
> self-consistent before pushing them. So there are no "good" distro
> states, only a string of "gray" system states, and it's totally wrong of
> yum to expect a "good" system state will appear some time in the future.
> Hell, in theory it would be possible for rawhide to never be in a state
> yum likes from FCx to FCx+1T1

Well we code yum to work properly in releases, not rawhide.  As I said
before, there is nothing stopping somebody from coding up a yum plugin
that does what you want and tossing it at extras.  Just don't look for
this feature in yum itself.

Jesse Keating RHCE      (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team      (www.fedoralegacy.org)
GPG Public Key          (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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