On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 02:18:48PM +0200, Joachim Frieben wrote: > Old Red Hat Linux had the habit of not breaking binary compatibility between > minor releases, only between major ones. Fedora is not Old Red Hat Linux. > Look at other distros like "Ubuntu". They would not even upgrade their kernel from > 2.6.x to 2.6.x+1 for their current release. Fedora is not Ubuntu either. > "Fedora Core" has proven to be much more "dynamical" in this respect. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives "Do as much of the development work as possible directly in the upstream packages. This includes updates; our default policy will be to upgrade to new versions for security as well as for bugfix and new feature update releases of packages and provide backports where it's more feasible." (This is really badly worded btw. The intent here is to suggest moving to a new version, rather than 'backport' individual fixes to an older version) > If you really, really want the bleeding edge, then it's often possible to > install the "rawhide" packages on the latest stable release or to rebuild > the desired packages on your system. Which is often a *really* bad idea. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
