On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 06:08:14PM -0400, Marc Deslauriers wrote: > On Sat, 2005-04-16 at 12:52 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Saturday 16 April 2005 12:21, Daniel Roesen wrote: > > > Could superseeded updates please be moved to another directory, > > > like attic/ or so? So this is available at central sites, but > > > all local mirrors (like I do have for my systems) don't need to > > > carry them "just in case". > > > > Welp, I'll take community input on it. Is there anybody (besides > > me) that wants to keep the superseeded updates on the mirror > > server? > > I would like the superseeded updates to stay available. They are > invaluable in figuring out if it was one of our security updates > that broke something or if the original package was broken. I think this is a misunderstanding, noone wants to remove foo-1.2.3-4 when FL releases foo-1.2.3-5.legacy. The "superseeded updates" are superseeded by updates coming from Red Hat. I.e. these packages have vanished from the Red Hat master mirror. As an example: -rw-r--r-- 1 ftp ftp 92161 Apr 14 2004 download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/1/updates/i386/neon-0.24.5-1.i386.rpm -rw-r--r-- 4 ftp ftp 92305 May 19 2004 download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/1/updates/i386/neon-0.24.5-2.1.i386.rpm The latter is what Red Hat's (frozen) update folder currently contains, while the former had been deleted by RH before FC2 went EOL. When FL issues neon-0.24.5-3.legacy.i386.rpm the vendor-superseeded package (0.24.5-2.1) should stay, but why keep 0.24.5-1? > I don't mind an "attic" directory, but I don't know how easy that is > to setup and maintain... -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpbV0erqLynR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
