 | | | elfutils version in U6 iso | elfutils version in U6 iso 2005-10-06 - By Stephen J. Smoogen
Back
On 10/5/05, Jay Turner <jkt@(protected)> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 03:06:23PM -0600, Ed Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 13:59, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > Ed Brown (ebrown@(protected)) said:
> > > > (Actually, it
> > > > looks like 0.91-3 rpms were also included with U5 ISO's: perhaps they
> > > > haven't been updated in the ISO's at all for some reason?)
> > >
> > > Correct.
> >
> > Your point is not clear, what is 'correct': that they haven't been
> > updated in the ISO's (which was apparent), or that there is some reason
> > for that? Why haven't they been updated in the ISO's? Is there
> > anything else in the ISO's that doesn't match U6 in RHN? Is this a bug,
> > is it documented anywhere?
>
> Yes there's a reason that the elfutils available from RHN doesn't match the
> elfutils incorporated in the U5 and U6 ISOs (and possibly others but I
> didn't go back to see where we started shipping the 0.91-3 version.)
> Unfortunately I can't say too much about the reason for this other than to
> say that it's intentional and it's expected that folks will update to the
> latest elfutils once they register to RHN and pull updates.
>
> The only other packages which should differ from the ISOs to RHN would be
> packages where errata was released between us cutting the release candidate
> images and making those public (which is generally a couple of weeks of
> exposure.)
There is also openoffice.org-style-gnome-1 (See http://ome-1.ora-code.com).1.0 which causes up2date
not to work for desktop installs.
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
--
Taroon-list mailing list
Taroon-list@(protected)
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/taroon-list
|
|
|