On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 19:47 -0400, G. Roderick Singleton wrote: > That would be nice except for one thing, these distributions check the > bios for newness and when it is not sufficiently new installation of > these becomes a big problem. On the other hand, RH7.3 is stable but does > need to support more modern apps. I would encourage the powers that be > at Fedora Legacy to consider keeping this one release as current as > possible as it is one of the few that can work on old hardware which is > likely found in basements and the third world. For that you don't need Fedora Legacy (FL). FL only exists to support security updates for End-of-Life'd Redhat releases. FL support for RH73 will currently remain as long as there is a need, which is a very good thing. However, if you want cool and neat-o apps for RH73, then FL is NOT the place for them. There are other sides fully capable of giving you "flash" and "wow" sort of stuff, but this is NOT in FL's charter and clearly should not be. You can get those types of packages from Dag Wieers (and presumably others) at: http://dag.wieers.com/home-made/apt/packages.php To give you an example of the differences, FL currently releases a updated version of SSH (openssh-3.1p1-14) where as Dag gives you something close to the "latest" and "greatest" version (currently it is openssh-3.5p1-11 for RH73). What's the difference you ask? The FL version is the original RH73 release of SSH with only current security patches/fixes applied. Dag gives you all the latest wiz-n-bang in an rpm that works on RH73. To me, as a service provider, I could care less about wiz-n-bang (although I do see the value it might provide to others). All I want is something that works securely and consistently over time, so I am very happy to use the SSH that FL releases (among all the other great stuff FL releases). Make sense? -Jim P. -- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
