On Wednesday 15 September 2004 07:04 pm, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > There is definitely more general activity about that that one would > with for. :-) To reflect recent alerts I added some patches > and comments to > https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2005 > All interested parties are invited to peek there. > > My personal preference is to follow the suit of RHEL and switch > to a patched gdk-pixbuf-0.22.0. Yes, I am using that right now. I agree with you on this one. I think this can be classed as a non-standard (for FL) approach, but it sounds like the most logical one. If everyone else is happy, we're probably just going to have to really give it some intense QA. With packages that have moved progressed so much, it gets harder and harder to easily backport anyway...we have enough issues to be looking at without spending half a day trying to get patches to apply to a single source tree. regards, Simon > > Michal > > > -- > > fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list -- Simon Weller LPIC-2 Systems Engineer NZServers LTD http://www.nzservers.com/ U.S. Branch <- To mess up a Linux box, you need to work at it; to mess up your Windows box, you just need to work on it. - Scott Granneman, Security Focus -> -- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
