Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 11:08:08AM -0600, Connie Sieh wrote:
> 
>>On Wed, 8 Mar 2006, Jaroslaw Polok wrote:
>>
>>>Here at CERN for SLC4 in order to avoid such unpleasent surprises
>>>we are using the yum protectbase plugin and label our repositories
>>>as 'protected': ie any newer packages not coming from our repos
>>>are excluded from yum transactions:
>>>
>>>- Maybe it would be worth including that plugin in
>>>SL (and configure it by default to enable repo protections) ?
>>
>>We include that in the SLF site too.
>>
>>What do others think?
> 
> 
> From a 3rd party's POV this is a very bad idea, as it breaks our
> repos.

First off, it currently IS in the distro

  yum install yum-protectbase

It is not installed by default
If you do install it, it does not have any particular repo setup by 
default, you have to setup the config file yourself.

Why is it that way?
To be honest, it is because of the 'Install Everything' people.  People 
install everything, then complain because something is broken, so I have 
to make sure even if every yum plugin is installed, it doesn't really 
hurt anyone.
The people who install everything also are usually the people who use 
3rd party repositories like Axel's or Dag's.
If you use Axel's (or Dag's) repository, there might be something in 
that repository that needs to update an existing package from plain 
Scientific Linux.  If you have the protectbase plugin set to protect the 
main scientific base, then you won't be able to install whatever it was 
you wanted because of this dependancy.

So ... in the end.  I could be persuaded to have the package 
yum-protectbase protect scientific linux base and errata areas by 
default.  But I really don't think having it installed by default is the 
right way to go.

Troy
-- 
__________________________________________________
Troy Dawson  [log in to unmask]  (630)840-6468
Fermilab  ComputingDivision/CSS  CSI Group
__________________________________________________