On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Jon Peatfield wrote:

> > sl-fastbugs - disabled by default - These are bugfixes that are put out by 
> > the upstream vendor, before the official updates. At the time of this 
> > writting, this is a new program, that the vendor calls 'fasttrack'. It is not 
> > enabled by default, because sometimes bugfixes change the way a program 
> > works, and the releases of S.L. are designed to be very stable.
> >
> > sl-bugfix-44 - disabled by default - These are the non-errata, updated 
> > packages from the next release. In this case, sl-bugfix-44, is in S.L. 4.3, 
> > and it points to all the bugfixes that happened in S.L. 4.4. Since S.L. 4.4 
> > currently isn't out yet, this repository is empty. When S.L. 4.4 is released, 
> > this repository will be populated, and S.L. 4.4 configuration will have 
> > sl-bugfix-45.
> 
> I find the term non-errata slightly confusing since the vendor refers to 
> all 3 kinds (security/bugfix/enhancements) as errata...
> 
> What about (non-security) errata that the Vendor *has* released (after a 
> given release).  atm there arn't many examples of those at the moment, 
> though ypserv *is* one e.g.:
> 
>    https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2006-0263.html
> 
> mentions ypserv-2.13-11 which isn't anywhere obvious other than 
> 43/<arch>/errata/fastbugs/... at the moment (ypserv-2.13-9 is in 
> 42/<arch>/SL/RPMS/ of course since that was current at the 43 release).
> 
> [ Aside: While looking at this I noticed that lmbench and rh2r (which had 
> bugfix releases last month) arn't anywhere in sl43 at all.  Is this 
> because there is no source or are they excluded for some other reason? ]

We only release binarys based on released SRPMS from the upstream vendor.  
I will check on these.

> 
> I'd always assumed that SL only (normally) included the security related 
> errata (plus any dependencies etc), but now with bugfix/fastbugs etc 
> things aren't so clear.  Has this changed?  

No. This is true for the security errata that show up in errata/SL/RPMS . 

This is why we made a completely different area for these new "Fastrack -- 
fastbugs" rpms.  We wanted to keep them in a different place but available 
for those that need them.

 > Do non-security errata now get into the main errata/SL/RPMS/ space?

Should not.  There have been a few exceptions because of Upstream Vendor 
issues such as new dependencies for a rpm.  I wish the upstream vendor did 
not do that.

> 
> Or am I just missing something about how the term errata is defined/used?

The Upstream vendor uses the term errata for security/bugfix/enhancements 
,  we used it for security errata as that was all that we really had 
available before (at least between releases) but not we have these 
Fastrack rpms and needed a place to put them,  so into the errata tree 
they went but in their own directory.

 > >   -- Jon > 

-Connie Sieh