On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 8:33 AM, William Hooper <whooper...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I've always thought yum should have its own 'reproducible updates'
>> concept so you could update a test machine, then tell all the others
>> to update to exactly that state even if some new things had been added
>> to the repositories -
>
> Kind of hard to do if the older versions have been removed from the mirrors.
Failing is OK. There are all kinds of reasons an update might fail
and you have to be able to handle that. Even if you had your own
mirror it might be down or unreachable. What you shouldn't have to
handle is installing some unexpected thing when you are just repeating
a command. Besides, if something has been removed from the mirrors,
it is a pretty good hint that there is a better use of your time today
than pushing that package into production.
>> That is, that should have been a design goal for yum
>> since that is the way people should manage multiple machines
>
> Yum's design goal was/is to be a dep-solver, not a management system.
Yes, that's what I mean. It is too bad the distribution doesn't have
a reasonable management system when it shouldn't be hard at all to get
the same versions of the same packages on two different machines - and
that is something almost everyone using an 'enterprise' distribution
needs.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
