yum versus make

[Jiří Sedláček]

What if there is a yum version of a package AND at the same time a compiled one? Looks like the yum version is preferred over the compiled one. Even though the building happened later.

Am I right? Is there a way to tweak this?

[Rob Morin]

Yum packages might not have the latest and greatest new features or bug
fixes as fast as compiling from source.
But Yum makes for easy instal land updates. :)

Rob Morin
Montreal, Canada

The Lounge Sound - Music to drink by - Vegas Style!

http://www.theloungesound.ca

"You're not drunk until you can't lie on the floor without holding on"
Dean Martin

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "blueprint-users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to blueprint-use...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

[Richard Crowley]

On Tuesday, May 7, 2013, Rob Morin wrote:

Yum packages might not have the latest and greatest new features or bug fixes as fast as compiling from source.
But Yum makes for easy instal land updates. :)

Indeed package management is easier in a lot of ways than file management.  Blueprint is setup to understand your custom Yum repositories, too. 

[Richard Crowley]

On Tuesday, May 7, 2013, Jiří Sedláček wrote:

What if there is a yum version of a package AND at the same time a compiled one? Looks like the yum version is preferred over the compiled one. Even though the building happened later.

Am I right? Is there a way to tweak this?

The two are pretty independent, assuming everyone's following the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (i.e. packages in /usr and make install in /usr/local), and possibly your PATH is all that controls which appears to "win."

[Jiří Sedláček]

PATH is user dependent so I would have to run "blueprint create" for every "significant" user. That's perfectly fine and expected. Thank you.