Les Mikesell wrote: > Rob Kampen wrote: >>>> by default base+updates should get priority over anything else >>>> including epel, don't you agree? >>>> >>> Not necessarily. I don't see any inherent reason that I would want >>> openjdk-b09 over b12 and I'd expect the reverse since b12 fixes known >>> bugs. But I would want to know that I'm not the first person to try >>> to run it, which is why I raised the question. >>> >>> >> I think priorities set globally should be for base and updates to be >> highest. In this case there is a particular rpm that the upstream vendor >> has not yet updated to the later release. Thus those that cannot wait >> can use yum exclude and thus move to another repo - in this case epel to >> get a later release. But as always if it breaks you get to keep the >> pieces..... >> Works for me. > > For some definition of 'works'... How would the person who needed the > newer version know it was available if they've excluded it? And since apt-cache policy, yum probably has something similar as Rob said, having highest priority for base+updates doesn't stop you from installing newer versions from elsewhere if you so decide. It just keeps you from doing so unwittingly. > epel isn't 'supposed' to overwrite stock versions (I think Rex verified > my impression of that policy), why would you expect to need to exclude "supposed" is the key word. only human... > epel or lower its priority - or if that does need to be done, why isn't > it done in the default *release packages for the repos? choosing the priorities for your various repos must be done by the user. Most people probably agree that base+updates should be highest, but beyond that it depends on your needs and personal preferences. In addition having priorities=N settings in the *release packages could be misleading since yum-priorities is not necessarily installed.