on 6-1-2009 10:49 AM Les Mikesell spake the following: > Scott Silva wrote: >> on 6-1-2009 9:43 AM Les Mikesell spake the following: >>> If you have the epel repo installed and enabled during a yum update, you >>> get java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0-1.0.b12.el5.2 instead of the stock .b09 >>> version. Is this intentional and desirable? I thought epel generally >>> did not replace stock components with newer versions. >>> >> Any third party repo has the potential to replace base files. That is why the >> priorities and the protectbase plugins were written. > > Obviously they have the potential - and almost equally obviously an end > user will have no idea what to choose even if they do have a tiny bit of > control over yum (but no way to see where their existing version came > from). But I thought that long ago I asked if epel would supply a newer > Firefox or OpenOffice (back when it was needed and RHEL hadn't done it > yet...) and someone replied that it would not be epel policy to > overwrite stock packages. Was that not correct - or have things changed? > EPEL was also asked if they could add a repo tag just so people knew where things came from. That didn't happen either, but much "discussion" did happen. As for EPEL policy, I guess you will have to ask them. Since it is Fedora packages being rebuilt, there is going to have to be some newer things being put in there.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
