[CentOS] What's wrong with yum-priorities?

[John R. Dennison]

On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 12:27:51PM -0700, Dennis Kibbe wrote:
> "The upstream maintainer of yum, Seth Vidal, had the following to say
> about 'yum priorities' in September 2009:
> 
> Gosh, I hope people do not set up yum priorities. There are so many things
> about priorities that make me cringe all over. It could just be that it
> reminds me of apt 'pinning' and that makes me want to hurl."
> 
> This note was placed on the wiki (PackageManagement/Yum?Priorities)
> without any explanation why yum-priorities isn't a good idea.

	I use yum-priorities on all boxen that have non-CentOS repos
	configured; I've not hit a single snag with it yet.  YMMV.

> yum-priorities doesn't appear in RHEL 5.4 but protectbase does. Is that
> the better choice and if so why?

	It has been pushed out, I believe, to the extras repo and is
	currently available there:

	repoquery --repoid=base --repoid=updates --repoid=extras --qf "%-20{repoid} %{name}" yum-priorities

	extras               yum-priorities

	For some reason it was not in the base 5.4 distribution.




							John

-- 
Anybody can win unless there happens to be a second entry.

-- George Ade (1866 - 1944), American writer, newspaper columnist,
and playwright
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20091122/2466d232/attachment.sig>