Stephen Smoogen said: > I would disagree strongly with that statement. As you add more OS's to > the legacy project and try to port fixes to each of those, you will find > that the size actually shoots up quite a bit. > > Worst case of shooting up diskspace is where you go to the latest > product versus backporting a patch. In most cases the latest product is > going to need a lot of supplemental packages also brought in because it > uses XYZ-3.so versus the XYZ-2.so that the older package used. Sometimes > it will also need something that was never included in the base product > of Red Hat. Isn't the whole point of Legacy to do the backporting? If you are upgrading versions and adding newer library dependencies wouldn't the testing be better spend on testing the newest version of the whole distro? That doesn't even get into packages that depend on whatever you are updating, config file changes, etc. At the point you are needing something that was never included in the base OS you are targeting take it somewhere else. That definitely goes against the policy of security fixes with minimal change. -- William Hooper
