Difference between revisions of "Talk:Yum-plugin-priorities"

From SME Server
Jump to navigationJump to search
m
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
 
:summary
 
:summary
:- on a clean system priorities isn't needed, but won't hurt
+
: on a clean system priorities isn't needed, but won't hurt
:- if you've modified, this will protect you, but you may need to work through rare blocked updates, which can be documented  
+
: if you've modified, this will protect you, but you may need to work through rare blocked updates, which can be documented  
:- the yum fragment has to be modified in the base or a template-custom used
+
: the yum fragment has to be modified in the base or a template-custom used
 
 
===Installation===
 
My "script" for modifying /etc/yum.conf is just my notes on how to make these changes easily and temporarily; I hadn't gotten around to making a custom template fragment yet...
 
 
 
==[[User:Snoble|Snoble]] 09:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)==
 
You should be able to use my script on 7.3 to populate the db
 
 
 
only difference is there will be a different fragment to modify /etc/yum.conf/something
 
  
 
----
 
----
Line 25: Line 16:
  
 
[[User:Mmccarn|Mmccarn]] 14:43, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 
[[User:Mmccarn|Mmccarn]] 14:43, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 +
 +
----
 +
I don't see how protectbase is any easier to configure, given that we need a template to default  non-specified repos to unprotected.
 +
 +
I suggest we add the template, db values and Requires to smeserver-yum
 +
 +
[[User:Snoble|Snoble]] 00:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:18, 26 November 2008

summary
on a clean system priorities isn't needed, but won't hurt
if you've modified, this will protect you, but you may need to work through rare blocked updates, which can be documented
the yum fragment has to be modified in the base or a template-custom used

If you are only using two priority levels why not look at protectbase. It basically does the same thing and you only have to indicate which repos you want to protect Slords (talkcontribs). 22:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


Is there a technical reason to prefer 'protectbase' over 'priorities'? If not, I'd prefer to stay with 'priorities' because, even though we're not advocating it for general use, it does have some more power for advanced users, or for future situations (I keep having ideas about this that turn out to be irrelevant when I start writing them down...)

I think 'priorities' is easier/safer since 'protectbase' defaults all non-specified repos to 'protected', while 'priorities' defaults non-specified repos to priority 99. If we use 'protectbase' we have to make sure all users set all custom repos to unprotected or else they will be protected, while with 'priorities' all custom repos default to the "correct" behavior.

I suppose this could be resolved by having the template expansion default repos to unprotected for any repo where "protect" is not set.

Mmccarn 14:43, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


I don't see how protectbase is any easier to configure, given that we need a template to default non-specified repos to unprotected.

I suggest we add the template, db values and Requires to smeserver-yum

Snoble 00:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)