[ydl-gen] stuff

[martin cohen]

--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Derick Centeno <dcenteno at ydl.net> wrote:

> From: Derick Centeno <dcenteno at ydl.net>
> Subject: Re: [ydl-gen] stuff
> To: "Discussion List for Yellow Dog Linux User Topics" <yellowdog-general at lists.fixstars.com>
> Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 10:53 PM
> > ... dependencies and at the very bottom something like
> this:
> > 
> > Transaction Summary
> > ===========================================
> > Install      0 Package(s)
> > Update       0 Package(s)
> > Remove     484 Package(s)
> > 
> > Is this ok [y/N]:
> > 
> > If you read what those package were, it would be
> painfully obvious that the
> > sane answer here would be 'n'.
> > 
> 
> It is often true unfortunately that the most obvious things
> require the most careful review.  This situation is no
> different.  Continuing with the example you stated, yum does
> list all the packages to be removed before it gets to this
> point, however this also demonstrates my original difficulty
> with yum and challenge to how yum is used in this particular
> form.  Even if I (as a user) cared to cross-check and
> examine which package is which and what it does before I
> answer yes or no, I could not do so using yum as you invoked
> it because all that information scrolls off the
> terminal's screen (stdout) and is lost.  Instead a
> better procedure or strategy is to split yum's output
> stream to an external file for later review so that
> accidental removal is could be potentially avoided by the
> user - if s/he takes the time to examine the generated file.
>  Also in any situation regarding using yum to remove
> anything, if one follows my suggestion I'd also
> recommend that the initial answer to yum's question be
> No thereby allowing the user to peruse the output file more
> carefully.  After having done so, then the user being better
> informed can further pare down which packages are removed
> reducing the risk of damaging his/her system.
> 
> I'd really think this adjustment or recommendation
> should be posted somewhere on the official pages addressing
> yum because this solution is not an obvious one.  Here's
> the approach I'd recommend:
> 
> yum remove openssl > filename
> 
> In closing one more point, as good as yum is and has been,
> like other unix/linux tools - even if it was incorporated
> into a system wide intelligent guiding avatar at some point
> in the future (say YDL 740.2?) human oversight of what and
> why it is engaging in any task will always be required.  It
> is always a strong regimen to recommend to users and in
> Linux every user is another system administrator in
> development whether s/he wishes it or no - it's the
> nature of what Linux is great power with flexibility.  By
> the way, my own experience with Unix goes back to the
> 70's - it's really our good fortune that Linux and
> YDL in particular allows for the usage of these tried and
> true simple strategies.  I'm a great believer in
> documenting the documents and can seek to overcompensate
> sometimes explaining too much but my concern especially in
> the example we are discussing is justified.
> 
> I hope my suggestion appears somewhere in the yum pages and
> not merely in my personal notes.
> 
> All the
> best..._______________________________________________
> yellowdog-general mailing list
> yellowdog-general at lists.fixstars.com
> http://lists.fixstars.com/mailman/listinfo/yellowdog-general
> HINT: to Google archives, try  '<keywords>
> site:terrasoftsolutions.com'

If you do this from an xterm with lots of saved lines (I like 10,000), you can scroll back to see what happened.