[CentOS-devel] CentOS-4.4 yumconf

[Johnny Hughes]

On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 11:28 +1000, John Newbigin wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
> 
> >>
> >>if the files are (config) type, then a locally user modified version
> >>will superseed the new rpm based one, and will result in your config's
> >>being left alone with the new files being dropped as .rpmnew
> >>
> >>I'd presume this is what happened ?
> The problem is an rpm issue where if you delete a config file, it will 
> 'come back' when an update is installed.

Don't delete it, replace it with either a neutered file (if you want to
use a different name) ... or replace it with your repo file ... named
the same thing.

It will then never be updated again, but be created as rpmnew when
updates happen.

> > 
> > 
> > The purpose of this change is so that we mirror what is done by
> > upstream.
> > 
> > They provide their update sources in redhat-release file.
> > 
> > A separate RPM for yumconf (and up2date-conf) is redundant.
> > 
> > Have it be part of yum or up2date is bad ...
> > 
> > I have no problem with a sperate yumconf package, but it is not in
> > keeping with upstream. 
> Does the upstream contain the yum confg files?  If not then I don't 
> think CentOS should be adding the files there.  I don't use up2date so I 
> can't comment on that.

RHEL-4 doesn't contain yum, however the rhn sources file is in redhat-
release.

As I said, we can change it back if it is a huge problem, but it makes
since to do all the update sources in one file (CentOS release).

Then, if you want to make your own distro ... replace that one file and
all your update streams can be adjusted.

Splitting out the files from the base package (as we did for apt and
up2date and yum) also allows you to use a yum or apt or up2date from a
different repo (3rd party) and still get centos updates.


> 
> In the past CentOS (yum) has required a yumconf, which is still the case.
> 
> The finger could also be pointed at yum.  Perhaps I need to change my 
> reposdir config.
> 
> John.
> 
> > 
> > If you produce a package with a new CentOS-Base.repo (and force install
> > it) that overwrites the other file, then when new updates happen it will
> > produce rpmnew files and should not affect you at all.
> > 
> > As I said ... i can be easily convinced to to shift back, but shouldn't
> > we try to do things like upstream?
> > 
> > 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20060905/47632379/attachment.sig>