On Fri, 2005-10-07 at 13:08 -0400, Sam Drinkard wrote:
Thanks for the clarification Greg. I kind of figured they both would work about the same, but didnt' know if there was a preference for one over the other or not. Just seems like up2date is the simpler of the two with a few clicks of the rodent and its done.
The up2date in CentOS uses a yum backend to retrieve the files anyway (though it uses an older version of yum than is included in CentOS-4). For updates only, up2date is very simple for users with a GUI, which is why it is included.
yum is more for all package management (install, remove, updates), and it can do updates easily from the command line. I use yum exclusively on server machines where I don't load a GUI ... but I have to admit that I also use up2date on my main workstation :)
Greg Knaddison wrote:
Snowman,
up2date and yum both work on top of or maybe "in cooperation with" the rpm package management system. So, if you like using one or the other to do your updating at a given time you can use either one and they won't get confused since they both store/read information from the rpmDB.
Yum uses metadata about a repository to know what is going on, what updates might exist, etc. You can use "yum list updates" to see what needs to be updated. Some people put a "yum list updates" and then redirect it to mail to them in their daily cron so that they know if they have updates rather than using the up2date applet.
When you start yum it goes to the repositories in your configuration files, pulls down the metadata from those repositories and then parses through it looking for updates, packages to satisfy dependencies if there are updates, and other fun stuff like that.
None of the files for CentOS (unless you changed something) from from anything RH related. I assume you know how that all works and said "RH" where you meant "CentOS"...
Regards, Greg