On Sat, Jun 19, 2004 at 12:52:03PM -0500, Richard June wrote: > > Yes, but choose based on what criteria? security, stability and > > functionality is what you check for. > > > > The argument of some (all?) repos carrying updates to the vendor repo > > is almost exclusively used with the background of stability. > Ok, let's drop stability for a minute. how's this for a good reason to be > *VERY* wary of upgrading vendor pkgs. > If you use FC1 and upgrade to KDE 3.2, any program which uses arts for audio > output becomes somewhat broken. IIRC it wasn't anything too major like it > wouldn't run, just it wouldn't run in KDE. You probably know about the kde-redhat project, so have a look and see how they solved this. > And these repos are usually the ones that cause breakage with the > vendors pkgs and with other vendor compatible repos. before I knew > better I used one of said repos. I confused the hell out of poor > yum. Well, all repos claim to be compatible to the vendor, it would be moot to announce an FC1 non-FC1 compatible repo ... -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpn32on3oEdh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
