[Fedora-legacy-list] Re: Force rpm upgrade?

[Lucas Albers]

> On Oct 31, 2003, at 1:25 PM, Warren Togami wrote:
>
>>> Lucas Albers wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Honestly, I think we all only care about one thing.
>>>> Erratta for our release.
>>>> The minumum amount of change necessary to keep using our systems.
>>>> No change in rpm. The very smallest security updates required to keep
>>>> our systems non exploitable.
>>>
>>> Agreed. I see the benefit of upgrading rpm, but I also fear some of
>>> the
>>> side effects.
>>> -1
>>
>> Please do not warn of side effects without giving concrete examples.
>> We
>> (the fedora.us team) have been grappling with these issues for more
>> than a
>> year now, and we are fully aware of the consequences of upgrading rpm.
>>  It
>> is my personal opinion that RH8 especially is UNUSUABLE without a rpm
>> upgrade, and it is almost entirely unfounded fear to not leave RH's
>> released version that prevents the benefits of the stable upgrade.
>> However if you have concrete examples of where this causes a great
>> failure, please make it known.
>
> I have one, but I'm still in favor of forcing everyone to rpm 4.2. I
> upgraded to rpm 4.2 (from Axel's site) on a RHL7.3 box here, which
> forced me to remove ucd-snmp and ethereal, because ucd-snmp has a dep
> on librpm404, and ethereal depends on ucd-snmp. To get around this,
> Axel created a librpm404-compat package, which after I installed, I was
> able to reinstall ucd-snmp and ethereal, so there are ways around it,
> and that's the only problem I've had with upgrading a Red Hat Linux 7.3
> system to rpm 4.2.
>
> --
> Jarod C. Wilson, RHCE
> jcw at wilsonet.com
> _______________________________________________
> Fedora-legacy-list mailing list
> Fedora-legacy-list at lists.dulug.duke.edu
> https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
>