----- "Scott Silva" <ssilva at sgvwater.com> wrote: > on 1-7-2009 10:00 AM Kai Schaetzl spake the following: > > Vandaman wrote on Wed, 7 Jan 2009 17:31:36 +0000 (GMT): > > > >> Why would the admin of the un-named repo include two versions > >> unless one could be an update/bugfix? > > > > So, what? Isn't he entitled to say no to an update if he knows there > is a > > problem on his setup with it? > > > > Kai > > > Yes, but yum needs a little coercion to ignore that update. > You would have to exclude that package after you got the older one > installed > so it didn't update. > The repo owner's latest packages technically 'work' but not to our standards hence the reason we're staying behind for now. We're not running any sort of automated 'yum -y update' or anything like that so I don't have to worry about updates causing issues. After all, I'm the only one who has access to the box. :-) Tim Nelson Systems/Network Support Rockbochs Inc. (218)727-4332 x105