I see a rather large problem with having the official yum site's newest stable branch having a bug like this. "Already fixed in Fedora" is good for Fedora, but setting users expectations that the yum website isn't where we are supposed to get the non-broken yum packages would be a good thing. In lei of a 2.4.2 release, perhaps you could put a note in a README file on http://linux.duke.edu/projects/yum/download/2.4/ saying "until 2.4.2 please use yum 2.4.1 from Fedora" ? Joshua On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 11:44:15AM -0500, seth vidal wrote: > On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 10:35 -0500, Joshua Jensen wrote: > > Any ETA on a version of yum 2.4 that fixes the current broken version? > > What else are you waiting on for 2.4.2 ? > > <shrug> > > I never considered the metadata cleaning thing a major bug b/c 1. you > can turn it off and 2. it will go away after a little while on its own > b/c the cookie expires. > > > What does anyone else think? make a 2.4.2 just for that bug? > > -sv > > > _______________________________________________ > Yum mailing list > Yum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum -- Joshua Jensen joshua@xxxxxxxx "If God didn't want us to eat animals, why did he make them out of meat?"
