seth vidal wrote: >> I'm voting for #3, especially if it's something that could be accepted >> upstream that won't break anything else. > > - except that we've already fixed yum 3.1.X for this problem. > > If you want to backport the patch from 3.1.x to 3.0.x that'd probably be > simplest. > > in fact, it's probably what red hat has done, too. I didnt know redhat had fixed this issue... Based on early info, the fix seems to be just a 3 line patch. However, I will go see what was done for 3.1.x - KB -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219 at icq