Il Thursday 29 November 2007 13:11:44 Tim ha scritto: > On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 10:57 +0100, Nico Sabbi wrote: > > a proof of $Subject: > > Which yum, and which release of Fedora? FC8, yum-3.2.7-1.fc8 > > > [nico@nico2 ~]$ rpm -qa | grep -i firefox > > firefox-2.0.0.9-1.fc8 > > firefox-2.0.0.9-1.fc8 > > [tim@suspishus abc891]$ rpm -qa | grep -i firefox > firefox-2.0.0.9-1.fc7 > > > [root@nico2 ~]# du -sh /usr/lib/firefox-2.0.0.* > > 6,8M /usr/lib/firefox-2.0.0.6 > > 20K /usr/lib/firefox-2.0.0.8 > > 43M /usr/lib/firefox-2.0.0.9 > > [tim@suspishus abc891]$ du -sh /usr/lib/firefox-2.0.0.* > 20K /usr/lib/firefox-2.0.0.5 > 20K /usr/lib/firefox-2.0.0.8 > 45M /usr/lib/firefox-2.0.0.9 > > The first two just have plugins directories inside them, and > symlinks to the flashplayer plugin inside the plugins directory. > I'd imagine that since I had installed a plugins, that firefox > updates didn't remove prior firefox directories. shouldn't the rpm scripts move the plugins to the new directory? > > > Why aren't these files removed? > > Don't know. Without seeing a listing of what's in yours, sorry, I deleted them > we can't > tell why it's still there. You might have had a failure during an > update, there might be something in there that ought to be kept. > > > I run yum clean all regularly. > > That's to do with the yum download cache, not the installed files. > > > Is there a way to purge entirely old packages? > > Manual file deletions... > I bet that yum is supposed to do it, not the user :)
