> On Oct 31, 2003, at 1:25 PM, Warren Togami wrote: > >>> Lucas Albers wrote: >>>> >>>> Honestly, I think we all only care about one thing. >>>> Erratta for our release. >>>> The minumum amount of change necessary to keep using our systems. >>>> No change in rpm. The very smallest security updates required to keep >>>> our systems non exploitable. >>> >>> Agreed. I see the benefit of upgrading rpm, but I also fear some of >>> the >>> side effects. >>> -1 >> >> Please do not warn of side effects without giving concrete examples. >> We >> (the fedora.us team) have been grappling with these issues for more >> than a >> year now, and we are fully aware of the consequences of upgrading rpm. >> It >> is my personal opinion that RH8 especially is UNUSUABLE without a rpm >> upgrade, and it is almost entirely unfounded fear to not leave RH's >> released version that prevents the benefits of the stable upgrade. >> However if you have concrete examples of where this causes a great >> failure, please make it known. > > I have one, but I'm still in favor of forcing everyone to rpm 4.2. I > upgraded to rpm 4.2 (from Axel's site) on a RHL7.3 box here, which > forced me to remove ucd-snmp and ethereal, because ucd-snmp has a dep > on librpm404, and ethereal depends on ucd-snmp. To get around this, > Axel created a librpm404-compat package, which after I installed, I was > able to reinstall ucd-snmp and ethereal, so there are ways around it, > and that's the only problem I've had with upgrading a Red Hat Linux 7.3 > system to rpm 4.2. > > -- > Jarod C. Wilson, RHCE > jcw@xxxxxxxxxxxx > _______________________________________________ > Fedora-legacy-list mailing list > Fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list >
