[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Supporting Earlier RH Versions with .src.rpm



jbj@JBJ.ORG (Jeff Johnson) writes:

> On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 02:09:49PM -0500, Kurt B. Kaiser wrote:
> > What is Red Hat's position on making small (forward compatible)
> > corrections to .src.rpm packages to support earlier versions like
> > RH6.2, on which the package was not offered?
> > 
> > As an example, LPRng won't configure correctly on 6.0 because the
> > owner of /dev/lp0 is root:daemon instead of the root:lp needed by
> > the package, and there is some kind of bug running LPRng that
> > causes the supplemental group memberships of user lp to be
> > ignored.  Adding lp to the daemon group doesn't work!
> > 
> > A small amount of added documentation or a chown during package
> > installation would fix the problem so that LPRng would work great
> > on 6.0/6.2, as it now does on my system.
> 
> AFAIK, Red Hat 6.0 is unsupported, only 6.2 (aka 6x) is still
> "supported".
> 
> Reporting problems in bugzilla is the best way to get a fix. For
> legacy support, we (i.e. the package "owner") look carefully at the
> impact.  e.g. number of affected users and/or the magnitude of the
> problem, in considering whether to actually release an errata.

In this case, it's relatively minor, and no errata would be needed.
What I would suggest is a slight change in the .src.rpm for a future
release, whereby the necessary chown is made.  That would set up 6x
correctly, and not affect 7x.

> No matter what, however, a bug report in bugzilla may/can/will
> help someone else with the same problem.
 
Excellent point.  Thanks.

73 de KBK









[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index] []