On Thu, 2006-12-21 at 14:03 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > Jean-Marc Pigeon wrote: > > > 2) The way I updated the FC6 with 2-1.241 was rather "blunt". > > Sorry about this, My purpose was to have the same (stable) > > version in devel (FC7) and FC6. > > According my quick reading of comment about this subject > > I should had update the tar file and check CVS diff.... > > Ok, my fault. > > > > So then: > > What is the best course of action to me clean my mess? > > For now, FESCo took action to update cvs to omit the offending yum.repos.d/* > file(s), see: > http://bugzilla.redhat.com/220497 I had some though about this repos.d story and I strongly disagree. As the piece of software clement is not an orphan one, master development is still alive and not within Fedora as such. The fact to add a reference within repos.d (in disabled mode) is in continuity with "Source:" specification within the spec file. Specifying a repos.d allow sysadmin to take (if he want) the last version while still not present on Fedora depository. Other alternative is to go to the ftp site, grab data recompile the all smash... Let see this from another stand point, clamav is a very important application to me, do I need to wait for the last version to be included in Fedora whatever to grab it, no..., what happen when FCX is not supported any more, but my production system is still FCX, do I need to fool around trying to figure out where to find the last RPM? my answer is no, while the reference is still FCX, it could me nice to have the latest application (if provided). From my stand point the repos.d/clement is an anchor and it is our duty (as application designer) to provide legacy RPM. When doing a release we provide clement's RPM from RH7.3 to FC6 and including Centos, RHEL and mandriva... tcpdump on FC6 is outdated, to have a reference to "enabled" in repos.d and reach a master site to grab the latest version. would be nice... (up to me to enable this specific repos.d). Once again, adding this anchor within repos.d is not conceptually different than the "Source:" information within spec file. I am afraid saying "repos.d" is out of reach is too self-centric. As Fedora cycle are very short this will imply Fedora can't be use to run a real application server. Sharing my feeling... > > Take care, > Rex > -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
