Greg Ennis wrote:
With recent updates to my test system, I found the below instances when yum was more reliable than up2date. If you are installing a program from a non-fedora site, yum seems to be more reliable for retrieval of the program. I have installed an entirely new installation and wanted to install a dvd player, which Fedora does not contain. Running "up2date ogle" did not give me anything but python scripting errors after attempting to retrieve the rpm. Yum, on the other hand, installed the program from the same mirror.Anyone,
Would you please point me in the right direction as to whether yum or up2date should be used for FC1. I have looked in the archives and have not been able to figure out the pros and cons of each. I presume that up2date downloads from RedHat and yum from one of the FC1 mirror sites. I never had any difficulty using up2date on RH 7.1 and 8.0 systems, but using it on FC1 is difficult because it stops about every third file that is downloaded.
Sure would appreciate some information about the differences between these.
Thanks,
Greg Ennis
Up2date and it's GUI are really nice for updating existing rpms. Yum seems to be better for installing rpms from third party sources. This may be due to the rhn-applet causing errors with third party mirror sites, I am not sure. I do know that programs from the fedora site installed fine with up2date.
Basically, it is great to have as many upgrading/installation tools for different needs. for Fedora Core 1, I have apt, yum, up2date and redcarpet installed. All do different things better than the other. All help get programs installed that I like.
The best program for correcting fouled up systems is redcarpet, in my opinion. This is from my experience with the update/install agents.
Jim
-- You will be singled out for promotion in your work.
