It was my understanding that minimal changes were to be made to the original redhat distributions, so it would make sense to stay with the existing rpm version (unless it has a security flaw) and use yum 1.x. According to Fedoralegacy.org: -------------------- In most cases, fixes are backported to the current package version rather than upgrading the package to a newer version. This is done in order to limit the possible side-effects which can result from an upgrade. Packages are only upgraded to a newer version if consensus dictates that we should do so for some specific reason. -------------------- Does yum 2.x have some significant difference or features over yum 1.x that make it much more compelling to upgrade rpm as well? And is this difference or feature critical or significant to it's operation? I was of the thinking that changes to newer version would be kept to a minimal to avoid possible side-effects. Redhat didn't upgrade RH8's rpm over it's lifetime... so they must have deemed it stable (or stable enough). Do we... or should we... rock the boat just to get a newer version of yum? Just my 2c ... this has been discussed to death already ;-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jesse Keating" <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, 29 January, 2004 1:48 AM Subject: Re: yum and rpm updates for 8.0 Ran into a snag when discussing the rpm upgrade for 8.0. I've agreed to once again put the rpm upgrade from rpm.org in the 8.0 legacy-utils, but this leads to a yum question. I do believe yum2.x works with the upgraded rpm, but not with the stock RPM. The stock RPM will need yum 1.x, so we have to roll out 2x yums. (can somebody correct me if I'm wrong here?) Also, I had to finish up some work on a chapter I'm writing for an upcoming book last night and I didn't get any free time to make that rpm build.
