Sender: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:14:32 -0600 |
MIME-version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-type: |
text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Content-disposition: |
inline |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-transfer-encoding: |
7BIT |
Comments: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On 3/15/07, Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Karanbir Singh wrote:
> >
> > Considering everyone has moved to including the yumconfigs in the
> > -release package, I wonder why you are still shipping alternate yumconf
> > packages?
> >
> > - KB
>
> Everyone hasn't *moved* to including the yum configuration in the main
> release package, it's always been that way. And we've always pulled it
> out. It's been that way since yum 1.0.
Sorry people talking past each other alert :)
What Karanbir is talking about is in the redhat-release, or
centos-release package. When you go to the dell, dag, etc
repositories, you get a dell-release, dag-release, livna-release etc
that contains the /etc/livna-release file and the stuff to stick in
/etc/yum.repos.d/ directory.
I hope that is a bit clearer.
> And I've always wondered why people put it in the main package of yum.
> Yes, yum has to have a yum-conf in order for it to do anything, but why
> replace an entire program, just to change it's configuration file.
> Troy
> --
> __________________________________________________
> Troy Dawson [log in to unmask] (630)840-6468
> Fermilab ComputingDivision/LCSI/CSI DSS Group
> __________________________________________________
>
--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"
|
|
|