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.
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.
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?
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel