Yum disaster! DELETED mysql!

[Nat Gross]

On 11/9/05, Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 11:38 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 06:45, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >
> > > > Ok. Logged in under FC4 and doing a 511Meg yum update now.
> > > > I DO have the old fateful FC3 yum log. Can't copy it here yet (my
> nfs
> > > > mounts not working yet on the new fc4 upgraded server).
> > > > But one line of the log reads "installing mysql 3.x"). [Which it
> > > > didn't. Just dl'd the RPM's.]
> > > > And after that, two lines: 1. "erased mysql server". 2. "erased
> mysql
> > > > client".
> > > > If this ain't a bug, what is?
> > >
> > > If its a bug it should be in bugzilla. File it along with the yum log
> > > output. You can also post to the yum devel list if it requires further
> > > discussions
> > >
> > > http://linux.duke.edu/projects/yum/
> >
> > But whose bug is it when a distro package tries and fails to replace
> > some non-standard package that isn't even split into the same RPMs?
> ----
> it falls back upon the user who passed the '-y' to the yum update
> command which afforded the user no opportunity to review the changes to
> be made.
>
> Craig
>
> -y is ok if yum works correctly. Suppose yum automatically overwrote the
kernel with 2.0, and rebooted your machine (just an example, I know!), is it
still the user's fault for using -y?
Anyhow, I am still using yum, just -y uh-uh.

[btw]Thanks to everyone on this thread.
-nat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20051109/530fe9a4/attachment-0002.html