On 3/5/07, Rick Stevens <rstevens@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 13:44 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Michael A Peters wrote: > > > On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 12:53 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > i'm sure there's a trivial answer to this but i was just handed an > > > unlabelled DVD, allegedly of the FC6 respin. short of comparing some > > > RPM versions on the DVD, is there an obvious way to tell that this is > > > the respin and not the original FC6? thanks. > > > > Look at the kernel rpm - respin is newer. > > That's just one package. > > oh, i realize it's easy to check with a single RPM comparison. but > i'm interested in whether the respin release is identified in a more > obvious way. or is there no value in being able to tell the > difference? Well, you could do an sha1sum on the DVD. The i386 version of the respin has a signature of 0f6a53cf9c820eb91a8fa3b3589cbb1ec6b64643. The original FC6 i386 has 6722f95b97e5118fa26bafa5b9f622cc7d49530c. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Rick Stevens, Principal Engineer rstevens@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -
Almost three months have elapsed and numerous updates have occurred since the availability announcement. Is anything to be gained by using the respin versus the original? You definitely will loose the 2.6.18 kernel which some of us need because of a PS/2 mouse bug in the new kernel releases. Perhaps it's time for Fedora Unity to make another spin.
