On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 15:51 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Jeremy Katz wrote:
> So, I commented a little on Colin's related patch... I'm leaning towards
> this approach, though.
>
> On Sun, 2007-08-05 at 20:33 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
>> A patch to change the location of the yum cache directory.
>>
>> This enables existing yum cache to be used, which in our case is
>> especially useful because that cache is populated already. Most
>> importantly, livecd-creator doesn't bind mount the yum cache directory.
>
> Why not do the bind mount? By bind mounting the cache as /var/cache/yum
> in the chroot, you don't have to do any mucking with the yum config
> which should make it so that you just have to get the option and if it
> doesn't exist, fall back to the default. It also makes the cachedir
> available to the chroot in %post which people could take advantage of if
> they wanted
>
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by 'any mucking with the yum
config'. Is it the 'temp' yum config livecd-tools you're talking about,
LiveCDYum._writeConf()?
Yep.
That config isn't used in our case so it doesn't
need any mucking, but I understand your point -if the --yumcache option
is in livecd-tools and it doesn't get bind mounted, that'd need mucking.
Bind mounting or not bind mounting is a different matter; it doesn't
need discussion as much, because there's no specific reason we currently
don't bind mount. It's no show-stopper -that I know of.
Right, I think that bind mounting makes the patch simpler and still gets
the same result. So if there's not a reason the bind mount won't work
for you, let's go that route
If the patch did the bind mount and let's one choose the yum
cache
directory to use (e.g., to bind mount), all is fine, right?
Yep, should be good to go
Jeremy