On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 17:06 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 10:37 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> > If this is true, the issue even is independent of smart.
> > [FWIW: I repeatedly had seen similar issues happening with yum.]
> you've seen yum try to downgrade a package?
> Wow, i'd love to see that. could you show me a screenshot of that
There seems to be a misunderstanding. What I have seen happening is yum
behaving differently in consecutive yum run.
E.g. I've seen the following:
# yum check-update
[reports a couple of packages to update]
# yum update
My explanations is that yum was choosing different mirrors in these
runs, where it happens to hit mirrors in different states.
When the libtool issue occurred, a couple of days ago, this produced
Consecutive "yum update" runs either bombed out with "broken
repository", upgraded a couple of packages, or had found nothing to
My explanation: Different mirrors where in different states of sync.
Depending in which shape the currently chosen mirror and the current
state of the system was, yum updated some older packages, found the
libtool<->gcc conflict, etc.
which is not, AT ALL, the same as giving the user a process to continue
to that will put their system in a questionably functional state. How
many users do you know that will just type 'yes' at every prompt? I know
a lot of them. That's a good reason, alone, to not allow
downgrade/removal paths that the user did not explicitly select.