[Yum] Re: yum] Re: yum] Survey of Use

[R P Herrold]

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, seth vidal wrote:

> > which will be used to schedule the actual install/upgrade.  A
> > missing dependency would be a 'failure'.
> 
> so let me make sure I understand what this entails:
> 
> you need to run yum with a '--what would you do if' parameter - and if
> it say what things it would need to do to update. Is that right?

yes -- but in 
     https://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91
I was also going to use it as an 'install' tool assistant as 
well.  I don't think it matters to the code paths that it is 
an install, but I thought I should mention it, just in case.
 
> I was looking at the yum download-only patches and the one thing I don't
> like is they all seem like overkill.

smile -- I was admiring Miguel's proposed patch; to my eye, it
looks like it is about as small as adding the 'retrieve' or
'downloadonly' can be made -- but I am always willing to learn  
;)

> What if there was a more-simple yum download-only mechanism 
> [... as ... ] a second, optional, y/n check AFTER the 
> packages were downloaded.
  <snip>
> If it was done that way it's:
>  1. a trivial amount of code
>  2. not just a download-only mechanism but an easy way for people to be
> MORE careful about installs.

> Thoughts?

This redefinition through a non-default option works for me as 
an approach.  I can work with that.

-- Russ Herrold