On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 09:23:48AM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On Sun, 8 Apr 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >The current thinking seems to be to just ignore them* but this is > >guaranteed to result in a lot of confusion. When end users do a > >distribution upgrade via yum or Anaconda, some of the packages might not > >have been updated to the Fedora 7 version due to incorrect packaging or > >other issues while the rest are packages which are deliberated not rebuild > >to avoid churn. Debugging a end user system with such a mix of packages is > >very painful. > > Dist tags considered harmful... :) RHEL 5 suffers from this same > syndrome, it has loads of packages tagged "fc6" which I could imagine > causing quite a bit of confusion as well. Well, less confusion than surprised customers that would expect RHEL to go through the rebuilding of these packages and test the result instead of Fear-Of-Rebuilds. I wonder if RHEL even carries all required build dependencies to rebuild such a package. If not, it will be fun for the packager doing the bugfix/security update. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpfvcKrAgvwR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
