Johnny Hughes wrote: > 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. > > 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? I also think the old way was better. We have our own "centos-yumconf-local" package, which does an "Obsoletes: centos-yumconf", so as soon as we added our local repo to a new system (containing this package), it would automatically update to our own yum configuration. Now that does not work anymore, and I would have to replace centos-release to get the same effect. I will have to rebuild this centos-release package for every CentOS release. It's no big deal, because I also have to rebuild other packages for each major release (e.g. glibc for Xen), but I still wanted to say that I preferred the old way. Perhaps building the centos-yumconf rpm from the centos-release src rpm, like Gordon suggested, is a good plan? Best Regards, Michael Paesold