On Tue, 2007-04-10 at 11:55 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>> "MS" == Marc Schwartz <marc_schwartz@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > MS> While there were some changes that needed to be made in configs, > MS> etc, it wasn't tragic. > > It's pretty damn tragic if your running installation happens to break > because the maintainer happens to push an update on the weekend you're > out of town. You simply cannot require manual intervention for a > simple update. F7 can get the new version. > > Really, Enrico's doing the proper thing here. The only complaint I'd > make at the moment is that he's left in the "Your installation is > OUTDATED" message that I get in my logs every day. But unless there > are unpatched security issues in the stable release, I just don't see > what the fuss is about. Jason, The issue is: 1. As far as I can see, unless you can point me to it, the latest version of clamav is not in any of the relevant repos targeted for F7. 2. This means that you will have to deal with this clamav upgrade post the F7 upgrade and face the same issues that you would face now on FC6 relative to config file breakage. 3. There are comments and pointers to scripts in the Bugzilla report that I referenced, by me and others, relative to at least possible and reasonable 'automated' upgrade processes during the RPM installation procedures. As far as I and others can tell, Enrico seems to be resistant to even exploring and testing these as possible options. 4. Take note of this post by Luca Gibelli of ClamAV a month ago, relative to the burden being placed on their signature update servers by users of versions prior to 0.90.x: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.security.virus.clamav.user/25389 There are compelling reasons to upgrade beyond security patches and related considerations. Regards, Marc -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
