I use FC2, so the question is resolved for me. But I suppose I'll eventually go to a later version. While it was available for me, I used up2date, with the little icon on the "taskbar" (or whatever it's called in FC). I had no problems with it. In fact, it appears to be a GUI to yum.
So, why do I see messages here promoting yum over up2date? IOW, what advantage does yum have for someone simply wanting to update his packages?
Mike
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 09:29:20AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
I use FC2, so the question is resolved for me. But I suppose I'll eventually go to a later version. While it was available for me, I used up2date, with the little icon on the "taskbar" (or whatever it's called in FC). I had no problems with it. In fact, it appears to be a GUI to yum.
So, why do I see messages here promoting yum over up2date? IOW, what advantage does yum have for someone simply wanting to update his packages?
Mike
It is a matter of taste. Since you have discovered it is really the same program I would choose the on that suits your temperament. I have a colleague who like me has recently gotten the internet in her home. We discussed how to sent mail. I told her Evolution works well she said she is willing only to consider command line programs. Tastes differ,
akonstam@trinity.edu wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 09:29:20AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
I use FC2, so the question is resolved for me. But I suppose I'll eventually go to a later version. While it was available for me, I used up2date, with the little icon on the "taskbar" (or whatever it's called in FC). I had no problems with it. In fact, it appears to be a GUI to yum.
So, why do I see messages here promoting yum over up2date? IOW, what advantage does yum have for someone simply wanting to update his packages?
Mike
It is a matter of taste. Since you have discovered it is really the same program I would choose the on that suits your temperament.
up2date and yum are not the same program. At least, they weren't up until FC4. In FC4, up2date calls python modules from yum to handle repomd style sources (which are the default for FC4). The code for handling other types of repos (e.g. RHN channels, apt, old-style yum [pre FC4]) is entirely separate code.
The best reason for using yum in FC4 is that it works more reliably than up2date.
Paul.
Paul Howarth wrote:
akonstam@trinity.edu wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 09:29:20AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
I use FC2, so the question is resolved for me. But I suppose I'll eventually go to a later version. While it was available for me, I used up2date, with the little icon on the "taskbar" (or whatever it's called in FC). I had no problems with it. In fact, it appears to be a GUI to yum.
So, why do I see messages here promoting yum over up2date? IOW, what advantage does yum have for someone simply wanting to update his packages?
Mike
It is a matter of taste. Since you have discovered it is really the same program I would choose the on that suits your temperament.
up2date and yum are not the same program. At least, they weren't up until FC4. In FC4, up2date calls python modules from yum to handle repomd style sources (which are the default for FC4). The code for handling other types of repos (e.g. RHN channels, apt, old-style yum [pre FC4]) is entirely separate code.
The best reason for using yum in FC4 is that it works more reliably than up2date.
Paul.
But I think that to upgrade from FC3 (or FC2) to FC4, 'yum upgrade' generate some problems. 'Up2date' I think it doesn't have this problem (I haven't tested it yet!!!). What do you think about? --- Liloulinx (http://freealilou/free.fr)
___________________________________________________________________________ Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger Téléchargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com
On 8/5/05, Liloulinx alilou_linux@yahoo.fr wrote:
Paul Howarth wrote:
akonstam@trinity.edu wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 09:29:20AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
I use FC2, so the question is resolved for me. But I suppose I'll eventually go to a later version. While it was available for me, I used up2date, with the little icon on the "taskbar" (or whatever it's called in FC). I had no problems with it. In fact, it appears to be a GUI to yum.
So, why do I see messages here promoting yum over up2date? IOW, what advantage does yum have for someone simply wanting to update his packages?
Mike
It is a matter of taste. Since you have discovered it is really the same program I would choose the on that suits your temperament.
up2date and yum are not the same program. At least, they weren't up until FC4. In FC4, up2date calls python modules from yum to handle repomd style sources (which are the default for FC4). The code for handling other types of repos (e.g. RHN channels, apt, old-style yum [pre FC4]) is entirely separate code.
The best reason for using yum in FC4 is that it works more reliably than up2date.
Paul.
But I think that to upgrade from FC3 (or FC2) to FC4, 'yum upgrade' generate some problems. 'Up2date' I think it doesn't have this problem (I haven't tested it yet!!!). What do you think about?
Liloulinx (http://freealilou/free.fr)
Up through FC3 up2date is/was a working utility. The revamped version for FC4 is broken and needs repair. Since the latest version is based upon yum libraries this begs the question: "Why not just use yum?"
On Sat, 2005-08-06 at 03:17 +0200, Liloulinx wrote:
Paul Howarth wrote:
akonstam@trinity.edu wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 09:29:20AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
I use FC2, so the question is resolved for me. But I suppose I'll eventually go to a later version. While it was available for me, I used up2date, with the little icon on the "taskbar" (or whatever it's called in FC). I had no problems with it. In fact, it appears to be a GUI to yum.
So, why do I see messages here promoting yum over up2date? IOW, what advantage does yum have for someone simply wanting to update his packages?
Mike
It is a matter of taste. Since you have discovered it is really the same program I would choose the on that suits your temperament.
up2date and yum are not the same program. At least, they weren't up until FC4. In FC4, up2date calls python modules from yum to handle repomd style sources (which are the default for FC4). The code for handling other types of repos (e.g. RHN channels, apt, old-style yum [pre FC4]) is entirely separate code.
The best reason for using yum in FC4 is that it works more reliably than up2date.
Paul.
But I think that to upgrade from FC3 (or FC2) to FC4, 'yum upgrade' generate some problems. 'Up2date' I think it doesn't have this problem (I haven't tested it yet!!!). What do you think about?
"yum upgrade" is still not a supported upgrade mechanism, though it works OK for most people (see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/YumUpgradeFaq for some issues). Anaconda (install from CD/DVD) is the "official" way of upgrading. Whilst it's possible to upgrade using up2date too, I've never actually heard of anyone doing this, so I suppose it's true to say I've never heard of anyone having problems doing it...
However, the main purpose of yum and up2date is to install software updates and new packages, and both work fairly well for that, though up2date in FC4 is rather more buggy, which you may discover if you use use local repos.
Paul.
-
akonstam＠trinity.edu -
Kam Leo -
Liloulinx -
Mike McCarty -
Paul Howarth