hi, what is the current release versions for centos? it seems to a trivial question although: - centos/3 -> 3.4 why not to 3.5? - centos/4 -> 4.0 why not to 4.1? on the other hand # rpm -q centos-release centos-release-4-1.2 why not centos-release-4.1-2? in the current case we can't write in yum's repo file we can't write: .../centos/$releasever/os/$basearch/ since $releasever is 4 and not 4.1 (or 4.0) so we have to lean on the symlink which currently point to an older version. but even if it's point to the right version imho it'd be better if $releasever should be 4.1 rather then 4.
just my 2c. yours.
Farkas Levente wrote:
hi, what is the current release versions for centos? it seems to a trivial question although:
- centos/3 -> 3.4 why not to 3.5?
Should happen any time soon.
- centos/4 -> 4.0 why not to 4.1?
It's in the release notes:
| If you don't want to manually edit anything now, in about 1 week | CentOS-4.1 i386 will automatically be made the default version and you | will be upgraded when you run yum any time after that.
why not centos-release-4.1-2? in the current case we can't write in yum's repo file we can't write: .../centos/$releasever/os/$basearch/ since $releasever is 4 and not 4.1 (or 4.0) so we have to lean on the symlink which currently point to an older version. but even if it's point to the right version imho it'd be better if $releasever should be 4.1 rather then 4.
That would break expected (i.e. "true" RedHat compatibility) behaviour.
Yes I've already been bitten by the symlink still going to 3.4 instead of 3.5, but who'd expect httpd being newer in 3.4 than in 3.5?
Is that an error? Should that be filed as a bug?
3.4: httpd-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.2 (and it's in base, not updates) 3.5: httpd-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.1
Ralph
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 10:27:09AM +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Yes I've already been bitten by the symlink still going to 3.4 instead of 3.5, but who'd expect httpd being newer in 3.4 than in 3.5?
Is that an error? Should that be filed as a bug?
3.4: httpd-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.2 (and it's in base, not updates) 3.5: httpd-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.1
in 3.5 it is httpd-2.0.46-46.ent.centos.1 (release version is 46 not 44).
Tru
Tru Huynh wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 10:27:09AM +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
3.4: httpd-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.2 (and it's in base, not updates) 3.5: httpd-2.0.46-44.ent.centos.1
in 3.5 it is httpd-2.0.46-46.ent.centos.1 (release version is 46 not 44).
Argh. I must be blind. I pondered over that for some time on friday, but didn't see that.
I'll just go into hiding then ...
Ralph
On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 10:19 +0200, Farkas Levente wrote:
hi, what is the current release versions for centos? it seems to a trivial question although:
- centos/3 -> 3.4 why not to 3.5?
- centos/4 -> 4.0 why not to 4.1?
on the other hand # rpm -q centos-release centos-release-4-1.2 why not centos-release-4.1-2? in the current case we can't write in yum's repo file we can't write: .../centos/$releasever/os/$basearch/ since $releasever is 4 and not 4.1 (or 4.0) so we have to lean on the symlink which currently point to an older version. but even if it's point to the right version imho it'd be better if $releasever should be 4.1 rather then 4.
It needs to be 4 (or 3) for 3rd party apps.
3.4 and 4.0 are still the Official releases.
When the 3/ and 4/ are changed THEN, 3.5 and 4.1 will be the official releases.
We can't change the symlink until all the arches are ready ... and x86_64 for each is not ready yet.
If you choose to use 3.5 or 4.1 before that time, you must manually edit your yum.conf (for 3.x) or CentOS-Base.repo (for 4.x) to point to the new repo (3.5 or 4.1) and not $releasever.
For the vast majority of users, it is best to just wait until the 3/ and 4/ become the officially released version ... all security updates are already released from the updates (on day 1), only enhancements and bugfixes are left as part of the 3.5 or 4.1 process.
-
Farkas Levente -
Johnny Hughes -
Ralph Angenendt -
Tru Huynh