SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL Archives

March 2012

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mark Stodola <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mark Stodola <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 20 Mar 2012 15:07:21 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (35 lines)
What is the policy/procedure for minor releases getting security and 
other updates?  I'm holding at SL 5.2 for various reasons and am unable 
to upgrade to any later releases at this time.  I've noticed that the 
SRPMS directory under the 5.2 tree contains newer releases of some 
packages (for example, virt-manager).  Is this an artifact of some hard 
linking?  The copy of virt-manager in the main 5.2 repo is broken 
(python error in libvirt recognized by TUV).  I see a newer srpm, but no 
corresponding binary package.

I was under the impression (perhaps wrongly) that TUV was to support all 
releases for 10 years and that a viable option was to remain on a minor 
release and still receive reasonable bugfixes/security errata.  Does SL 
vary from this?  Please correct me if I'm wrong.  It seems whenever 
someone has trouble, the first knee-jerk reaction is to have them 
upgrade to the latest release, which isn't always viable.  I guess it 
becomes a gray area when it comes to which packages are released for the 
older updates.

Also, I've seen the firefox 10.x packages going into testing for 
5.7/5.8.  Will these be supported/released as updates for older 5.x 
trees?  What has TUV done in this regard?

Cheers,
Mark

-- 
Mr. Mark V. Stodola
Digital Systems Engineer

National Electrostatics Corp.
P.O. Box 620310
Middleton, WI 53562-0310 USA
Phone: (608) 831-7600
Fax: (608) 831-9591

ATOM RSS1 RSS2