Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 30 Jun 2009 09:05:53 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Denice wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Troy Dawson wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>> I have been wanting to update the kernel-module plugin for yum on SL5. I have
>> it all ready in the testing area, and it does work so much better than the
>> previous kernel module plugin.
>> The problem is that it does not backport very well to yum 3.0 which is on SL
>> 5.0 and 5.1. To keep things short there is a bug in yum 3.0 (and 2.4) that
>> prevents the plugin's from fixing up dependancies when yum gets them wrong.
>> This bug is fixed in yum 3.2 (which is what is in SL 5.2 and 5.3)
>> So why would I worry about upgrading the old yum?
>> Because along with bug fixes, there is a couple of feature changes. The
>> biggest change is that yum 3.2 automatically has the installonlyn feature.
>> This only keeps 'n' kernels on your machine.
>> This works pretty good and I think many people will think it's great. But I
>> don't know if everyone is going to like it, and they might be surprised by
>> it.
>> Anyway, I need opinions. Should I push the newer yum out to all of SL5? Or
>> should I just push it out to SL 5.2 and 5.3?
>
> I like the installonlyn feature, provided that the default number of kernels
> is not too low. I think 3 kernels, for example, is too low, but people
> will have different opinions. If it could be installed with a good default
> so that people don't have to change their configuration then it would probably
> be welcomed. Is this the one where you put an option like this in
> /etc/yum.conf?
> # Default # of kernels to keep.
> installonly_limit = 5
>
>
> cheers, etc.
> Denice
Yes, that is the option.
Troy
--
__________________________________________________
Troy Dawson [log in to unmask] (630)840-6468
Fermilab ComputingDivision/LCSI/CSI LMSS Group
__________________________________________________
|
|
|