On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 12:13 -0700, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote:
> While I agree that "yum clean all" is a pretty big hammer, I have to
> wonder why all the excitement every time it is suggested. It isn't
> like yum itself cares all that much about wasted bandwidth.
For those of us on slow connect
Hiisi writes:
> I wouldn't dare to suggest using 'yum clean all' on this list. It's
> nearly the same big mistake as posting in html.
;-)
While I agree that "yum clean all" is a pretty big hammer, I have to
wonder why all the excitement every time it is suggested. It isn't like
yum itself care
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 07:24:51 -0400 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
[ ... ]
> I'd recommend doing 'yum clean all' and then try again.
I followed this advice and it worked. Thanks.
Also thanks to all the others.
--Frank Elsner
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or chan
On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 09:32 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:40:12 -0430
> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>
> > If it comes to that, "yum clean metadata" is quicker since it doesn't
> > touch the packages. AFAIK the only reason to use "clean all" is to
> > recover disk space.
>
> F
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:40:12 -0430
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> If it comes to that, "yum clean metadata" is quicker since it doesn't
> touch the packages. AFAIK the only reason to use "clean all" is to
> recover disk space.
For this case also:
yum clean expire-cache
should work even better.
On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 08:20 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/25/2010 07:38 AM, Hiisi wrote:
> > 2010/8/25 Stephen Gallagher :
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> On 08/25/2010 06:16 AM, Frank Elsner wrote:
> >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/25/2010 07:38 AM, Hiisi wrote:
> 2010/8/25 Stephen Gallagher :
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 08/25/2010 06:16 AM, Frank Elsner wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I've 2 machines running Fedora 13, both with kernel
>>> 2
2010/8/25 Stephen Gallagher :
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/25/2010 06:16 AM, Frank Elsner wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've 2 machines running Fedora 13, both with kernel
>> 2.6.33.6-147.2.4.fc13.i686.
>>
>> When I did a "yum check-update" yesterday evening only one mac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/25/2010 06:16 AM, Frank Elsner wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I've 2 machines running Fedora 13, both with kernel
> 2.6.33.6-147.2.4.fc13.i686.
>
> When I did a "yum check-update" yesterday evening only one machine offered an
> update to the new new
Hello,
I've 2 machines running Fedora 13, both with kernel 2.6.33.6-147.2.4.fc13.i686.
When I did a "yum check-update" yesterday evening only one machine offered an
update to the new new kernel 2.6.33.8-149.fc13.i686.
What's behind? Different repos used by yum?
--Frank Elsner
--
users mail
10 matches
Mail list logo
