[CentOS] Re: BETA 2
Stephen John Smoogen
smooge at gmail.com
Thu Feb 22 19:26:23 UTC 2007
On 2/22/07, Matthew Miller <mattdm at mattdm.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 10:15:09AM -0800, Florin Andrei wrote:
> > >Well ... the majority of our problems are coming from the fact that
> > >upstream did not build everything on the same builder. They
> > >grabbed .fc6 stuff as is and used it (not necessarily compiled on their
> > >el5 builder).
> > >Many items are compiled against different kernel-headers, etc.
> > Wow! Why did they do that? Anybody knows?
>
> Red Hat seems to have, for a long time, followed a policy of not rebuilding
> packages which have been through QA unless there is a reason to rebuild
> them. So, packages which were built against older headers stay that way
> until there's either a new package release or a problem.
>
A rebuild is supposed to trigger a complete restart of the QA process
so it was easier to do so.. especially after all the logging required
for SOX and god-help-them-if-they-ISO-themselves.
--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"
More information about the CentOS
mailing list