Re: [rpm] RE: rpm-3.0.6 released

[herrold <herrold owlriver com>]

On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Kevin Ford wrote:

> Seems that the person the wrote the .spec file for this perl rpm
> is still worried about people compiling this on a 4.x system?!
> Come on, lets' be real about this.

ummm ... I actvely support an installed base including a couple of
of 4.x hosts, geographically remote, on 386 hardware with at most 16
M, but as little as 280M hard disks.  A version jump is therefore
infeasible.

As the next (sendmail|named|gpm|...) exploit comes out, and is
addressed in a SRPM packages to be readable by a later RPM, _I_ will
continue to back-build on a 4.x system.  Preferably a 4.0, so that
it works across the 4.x series.

Do I like it? -- No -- but the customer wishes to run the hardware
until it drops.

I was speaking at a newbie Linux user group last night, and
newcomers to Linux often pick up a crop of parts and pieces, and
cobble a experimental host together.  16 M installs are
... challenging ... with 6.x, but it is perfectly reasonable to
build an older RH version, and up-version it.

Red Hat has earned its market share by its care in not ignoring
older hardware and entry users (which in all fairness is not the
target of the upcoming release, but still a valid market to
foster).

The concern for installed and legacy base is to be commended, and
indeed, I appreciate Jeff's attention in this regard.  Thank you
very much,  Jeff!


> This is not meant to be compiled on any less than the RH 6.x
> series and above. 

.. I guess I missed that memo.

> RH 6.0 shipped with rpm-3.0.6-1. So why the check for
> 3.0.3-1?? 

Better go check your 6.0 CD -- absent time travel, the rpm version
is nowhere near 3.0.6 -- From memory, it was in the 3.0.3 range.

herrold]$ rpm -q rpm ; cat /etc/redhat-release 
rpm-3.0.2-5.x 
Red Hat Linux release 5.2 (Apollo)
herrold]$                                                        

-- Russ