Florin Andrei wrote: > Forget for a moment the fact that one should not override an RPM > package with files from a tarball :-) but look at this article: > > http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6300294422.html > > It seems like the author assumes that /etc/localtime is already a > symlink. Otherwise what would be the point in recommending to update > tzdata but don't do anything about /etc/localtime? > > So probably the article (posted on Slashdot, no less) is wrong from > the perspective of a Red Hat / CentOS user on two counts: > - the tzdata update method is bad > - /etc/localtime is not a symlink on RHEL/CentOS so the method is > incomplete > if you read back through the release notes of glibc and tzdata, it was determined ages ago that using a symlink from /etc/localtime to /usr/share/zoneinfo/<whatever> wasn't a good idea, /usr or /usr/share may be a seperate file system and not initially mounted Myself, I'm wishing our global operations all ran in UTC and -screw- localtime. of course, I'm also wishing DST would go the way of the steamtrain.