On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 16:21 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, Jeff Sheltren wrote:
> On Jul 27, 2007, at 8:48 AM, Michael DeHaan wrote:
> >I haven't looked at these packages yet, but I'm really glad to see this
> >being done. I mentioned this on #epel a few days ago -- lots of folks will be
> >looking for yum to be there.
> >The selfish reason for me to want it is that Cobbler
> >(http://cobbler.et.redhat.com) uses it for repository management and is
> >otherwise broken in EPEL (http://cobbler.et.redhat.com
) -- the not so selfish
> >reason is tons of RHEL4 users are already using yum for various things
> >(including maintaining their own repositories of lots of stuff, including,
> >sometimes, updates) and it would be nice if they could get their yum from
> >EPEL and use yum with EPEL if they wanted.
> The second issue was that RHEL 4 users can't use yum for system updates. Do
> we need to provide a wiki page explaining to RHEL users that yum is available
> only to fill dependencies and shouldn't be used directly? What are
> thoughts on this -- especially those that use RHEL? Is it confusing to have
> yum if RHEL can't use it to do system updates?
They can, with a tool called mrepo. mrepo can mirror repositories and RHN
channels and provide update packages for different RHEL versions, channels
and archs to an internal network (or the local system).
They can, and they do. We currently use mrepo to mirror RHEL4 and RHEL5
repositories of interest from our campus RHN satellite server. We use
yum to pull in our local, home-grown repos, as well as the RHN updates.
Furthermore, up2date seems to coexist just fine with yum.