[CentOS-devel] Shipping an EPEL release

Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
Tue Oct 9 15:37:59 EDT 2012


On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic <office at plnet.rs> wrote:
> On 09/17/2012 02:58 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Ned Slider<ned at unixmail.co.uk>  wrote:
>>>>
>>
>>> Besides, your approach simply won't work. If you were to install an
>>> edited (patched) repo file set to enabled=0, the first time a user runs
>>> 'yum update' and the repo file gets updated from the repo the user will
>>> be back at the repo's default settings regardless of how the distro may
>>> or may not have initially patched the repo file.
>>
>> Hmmm, that seems like a bug.  Should rpm packages clobber user configurations?
>>
>
> Sole purpose of the update for repository packages is to replace *.repo
> file with the one with correct link, but rather then to edit file they
> replace it, thus defaulting any change you made.

Which doesn't really answer the question of whether locally modified
config files belong to the administrator or the RPM author....  This
is something important enough that it really deserves to have the
'enabled' and similar options abstracted to something under
/etc/sysconfig - unless someone still holds onto the hope that one day
all repositories will be coordinated and not conflict with each other.
  Meanwhile, I'd say such a change should come in as a .rpmnew file so
you can reconcile the local edits manually (and maybe at least some of
them would).

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell at gmail.com


More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list