[mirror-admin] A question about timestamp issues.

[Jesse Keating]

On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 09:07 +0300, Axel Thimm wrote:
> I *think* that yum detects "newer" packages with the same nevra and
> upgrades to them - at least I've seen that behaviour when I
> accidentially forgot to bump a package's release and so the resulting
> package had the same nevra but a newer timestamp.
> 
> If the timestamp falls back to the past I guess yum will not touch the
> package.

Yum does not use the timestamp of the package for anything.  Only
content in the repodata effect yum's decisions.

Timestamps being different on rpm files won't really matter to yum et
al.  The timestamp on repomd.xml may cause yum to re-download it, only
to find that the checksums held within match the checksums already in
cache.  That would be the only adverse effect of different timestamps
across the mirrors.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/mirror-admin/attachments/20090814/f6f37bf4/attachment.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
--