On Oct 24, 2005, at 7:55 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote:
I did check before asking, thus the nature of my questions. I
haven't yet seen one bug filed for 2 packages where there are
separate fixes for each package, in fact I thought that was against
the rules. I do see how these two issues are related, but it
appears senseless to bundle the release when only one-half of it
affects RH 7.3 (for which there is no apache 2.0).
Hi Jim, perhaps some of your confusion comes from the fact that rh9,
fc1, and fc2 all contain the mod_ssl package as part of the httpd
package. In the older rh 7.3, mod_ssl was separate from apache.
To excuse this as "Other's checked before asking" is not accurate
as the data just isn't there to support even having the ability to
check. Show me discussions of this bug outside of a bugID that
isn't referenced anywhere else. And please don't suggest that I am
to be trolling bugzilla every day for the hundreds of packages for
which I may or may not be interested in knowing if a bug exists.
The bottom line is that I regularly keep on top of RH73 bugs/
updates/patches and I missed this. OK, so I am human and subject
to errors, but this bug stayed well below the FL radar for many
months. I have a pretty good record of downloading and testing
updates, so the fact that this critical one slipped by alarms me.
OK, sounds like you're just upset because you didn't see this until
the updates-testing notification. I'm not sure I understand what
you're trying to say here.
Anyway, sorry for the confusion.
-Jeff
--
fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
