On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 08:30:46AM -0500, Paul Michael Reilly wrote: > Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 02:50:38AM -0500, Paul Michael Reilly wrote: > > > So one of my systems has the service and another does not. Hmmmmm. I > > > drill into the issue further and it would appear that ATrpms provided > > > yum for the non-yum service system. Grrrrrrrr. Fedora's own dll > > > hell. And now it would appear that a total re-install would be > > > required to undo the dependence that particular system has on the > > > ATrpms packages. > > > > Disable ATrpms and reinstall the original yum. > > I tried to reinstall the original yum but did not disable ATrpms > first. That led to all kinds of complaints about other AT > dependencies. I will try disabling your repo but I will be pleasantly > surprised if that undoes the previous AT installs. No, yum cannot do that. You can use apt or smart to undo updates be that ATrpms or updates-released. > > > Live and learn. Whatever it was that convinced me to enable the > > > ATrpms repo is long since forgotten, but I will never use the site > > > again, but to meet an isolated and well defined need that cannot be > > > met from a less intrusive packager. > > > > 12:00 at the central station. No guns, only melee fight. > > So you must be the "AT" in ATrpms. I'm curious why your version of > yum is so different than the original. Does your repo have another > solution for an automated update? What makes it "so different"? yum at ATrpms has had a check4updates nightly cron job before Fedora Core even existed. And the nightly checks or updates have been controversially discussed. My POV is automated checks and notifications are OK, but automated installs aren't. > Would that be noon, or midnight? :-) Noon, now you pick the timezone. ;) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpfAvqImDoG9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
