Troy Dawson wrote: >> This brings up a thought that I was having. 1 - Switch from having >> a yum-conf rpm to having the default yum repositories in >> sl-release, like the rest of the world. Actually I like having the default repos in the yum-conf rpm, because I exclude it from the repo and use my own version with site customisations. But I could just have my own version of sl-release I suppose. Perhaps the Fedora spins stuff will superceded this. Jon Peatfield wrote: > While you are looking at the yum rempos etc can I suggest having > baseurls containing .../$releasever/... rather than having to have the > repo files updates for each point release? I agree; strongly, if it makes a diff. > Currently we replace the shipped yum.repos.d/ files with ones which uses > $releasever which means we need to have a few symlinks so that 5.4 -> > 54, 5.5 -> 55 etc but other than that saves us from all sorts of mess :-) We do the same (see http://mirror.triumf.ca/SL) Troy: >> ... have *all* non-sl yum repositories in their own rpm. Jon: > I strongly agree! Me too Troy: >> 3 - Have the yum priorities plugin installed by default, Agreed >> and all yum repositories need to have a priority ranking. Yes. This is already the case isn't it? Jon: > I've not looked at yum priorities, but I assume that you can temporarily > alter the order/priorities to pull in a version from a low-priority repo... You can do: yum --disableplugin=priorities install <package> or: yum --disablerepo=\* --enablerepo=<low-priority-repo> install <package> Of course the second fails if <package> has dependencies in [base] etc. When I know I want <package> from <low-priority-repo>, I run the second command to see what dependencies it pulls in from <low-priority-repo>. Then I edit the .repo file putting "priority=5" (making it a high priority repo) but add includepkgs=package,package-*,dependency,dependency-* So I get the updates to <package> and <dependency> without messing up anything else. -- Kel