Am Mo, den 10.01.2005 schrieb Johnathan Bailes um 22:34: > If I am missing something please let me know but I use this "example" > conf on my own box. > > I would never enable all these repos and took it as gentle gospel that > they were disabled by default for a damn good reason. > > I have seen much worse example apt and yum confs where this was > certainly NOT the case and all kinds of interesting things were > enabled that really should not have. > > Ok, what is my long-winded point? I thought this was a great example > conf because it did NOT enable freshrpms atrpms and dag by default > and posted examples of the judicious use of enablerepo for singular > apps the user might want. Hi Johnathan, thank you for your disagreeing reply. Really! Because it gives my perception a new bias. So it seems that at least there are exceptions from the rule I got so far, that the yum.conf from the FAQ page was taken without thinking too much about it. You got me wrong - for your case :) That's good - I have hope. Kind regards Alexander -- Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | new address - new key: 0xB366A773 legal statement: http://www.uni-x.org/legal.html Fedora GNU/Linux Core 2 (Tettnang) on Athlon kernel 2.6.9-1.6_FC2smp Serendipity 23:05:22 up 19 days, 49 users, load average: 0.62, 0.57, 0.55
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
