On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 09:29:20AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote: >I use FC2, so the question is resolved for me. But I suppose >I'll eventually go to a later version. While it was available >for me, I used up2date, with the little icon on the "taskbar" >(or whatever it's called in FC). I had no problems with it. >In fact, it appears to be a GUI to yum. > >So, why do I see messages here promoting yum over up2date? >IOW, what advantage does yum have for someone simply wanting >to update his packages? > >Mike It is a matter of taste. Since you have discovered it is really the same program I would choose the on that suits your temperament.

Paul Howarth wrote: > akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 09:29:20AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote: >> >>> I use FC2, so the question is resolved for me. But I suppose >>> I'll eventually go to a later version. While it was available >>> for me, I used up2date, with the little icon on the "taskbar" >>> (or whatever it's called in FC). I had no problems with it. >>> In fact, it appears to be a GUI to yum. >>> >>> So, why do I see messages here promoting yum over up2date? >>> IOW, what advantage does yum have for someone simply wanting >>> to update his packages? >>> >>> Mike >> >> >> It is a matter of taste. Since you have discovered it is really the >> same program I would choose the on that suits your temperament. > > > up2date and yum are not the same program. At least, they weren't up > until FC4. In FC4, up2date calls python modules from yum to handle > repomd style sources (which are the default for FC4). The code for > handling other types of repos (e.g. RHN channels, apt, old-style yum > [pre FC4]) is entirely separate code. > > The best reason for using yum in FC4 is that it works more reliably > than up2date. > > Paul. > But I think that to upgrade from FC3 (or FC2) to FC4, 'yum upgrade' generate some problems. 'Up2date' I think it doesn't have this problem (I haven't tested it yet!!!). What do you think about? --- Liloulinx (http://freealilou/free.fr)