Re: Enigma: yum check-update doesn\\\'t show all rpms in a repository
From: pmconway (no-reply-gw_at_fcp.homelinux.org)
Date: 01/21/05
- Previous message: Jim Cornette: "Re: 64 bit ati driver problem under FC3 x86_64 (long)"
- In reply to: Dennis Shaw: "Re: Enigma: yum check-update doesn\\\'t show all rpms in a repository"
- Next in thread: William Hooper: "Re: Enigma: yum check-update doesn\\\'t show all rpms in a repository"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: fedora-list@redhat.com Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 05:17:06 +0100
Thanks, Dennis, at long last, I understand! So, doesn't this severely limit the usefulness of check-update, or am I missing something? Can software somehow reconcile those minor discrepancies in the future or is it hopeless? How is one rpm's naming format changed midstream?
I quit using up2date because my kernel downloads (using dial-up access) always died. I ended up using either Windows (ugh) or Downloader for X. Is security really that much worse without the benefit of GPG?
I REALLY appreciate your shedding some light for me on this problem. If you don't have time to answer all the new questions, I more than understand.
Trish
-- This is an email sent via the webforum on http://fcp.homelinux.org -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
- Previous message: Jim Cornette: "Re: 64 bit ati driver problem under FC3 x86_64 (long)"
- In reply to: Dennis Shaw: "Re: Enigma: yum check-update doesn\\\'t show all rpms in a repository"
- Next in thread: William Hooper: "Re: Enigma: yum check-update doesn\\\'t show all rpms in a repository"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]