[CentOS-devel] CentOS-4.4 yumconf

Wed Sep 6 00:26:26 UTC 2006
Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com>

On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 01:01 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> Jim Perrin wrote:
> >> I still need the real files from centos-release (such as
> >> /etc/redhat-release) which may change from time to time (when 4.5 comes
> >> out).  I could create my own replacement but I think that the files
> >> belong in the yumconf package and this may well be a centos bug.
> > 
> > I see this as an interoperability issue, and it should be discussed a
> > bit. I'm not convinced that  a yumconf package is the way to go, but
> > providing the files in centos-release doesn't seem to be the right way
> > either. Other opinions?
> > 
> 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 purpose of this change is so that we mirror what is done by

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. 

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/20060905/4a317ca7/attachment-0005.sig>