On Wednesday 28 January 2004 10:27, Jason Lim wrote: > 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. Almost. The rpm locking issue is pretty bad, and Red Hat didn't upgrade it for certain internal political and technical reasons, which we are not bound to. > 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 ;-) Yum is not the reason for upgrading RPM, it is merely a side bonus. The lock issue is a big issue for people who use apt or rpm directly. Yum users are not effected as yum uses a different library which will not trigger the lock. For this reason, rpm will be left as an optional upgrade, not one that is forced/required of Legacy users. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) Mondo DevTeam (www.mondorescue.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating
Attachment:
pgp00243.pgp
Description: signature
