On 2/22/07, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 10:15:09AM -0800, Florin Andrei wrote: > >Well ... the majority of our problems are coming from the fact that > >upstream did not build everything on the same builder. They > >grabbed .fc6 stuff as is and used it (not necessarily compiled on their > >el5 builder). > >Many items are compiled against different kernel-headers, etc. > Wow! Why did they do that? Anybody knows? Red Hat seems to have, for a long time, followed a policy of not rebuilding packages which have been through QA unless there is a reason to rebuild them. So, packages which were built against older headers stay that way until there's either a new package release or a problem.
A rebuild is supposed to trigger a complete restart of the QA process so it was easier to do so.. especially after all the logging required for SOX and god-help-them-if-they-ISO-themselves. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
