--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Derick Centeno <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Derick Centeno <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [ydl-gen] stuff > To: "Discussion List for Yellow Dog Linux User Topics" > <[email protected]> > 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 > [email protected] > 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. _______________________________________________ yellowdog-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fixstars.com/mailman/listinfo/yellowdog-general HINT: to Google archives, try '<keywords> site:terrasoftsolutions.com'
