Steve wrote: > On May 4, 2010, at 10:24 AM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > >> And your point is? I mean, a) we're talking about CentOS yum update, and >> b) a 5.5 update showing up before 5.5 is released. > > from your post here > > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2010-May/093953.html > > i infer that the package in question comes from EPEL. is that correct? I think so. > (if so, i suggest that you make use of EPEL support resources: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#Where_can_I_find_help_or_report_issues.3F). > > i don't know how the EPEL maintainers are handling the interval between > RHEL 5.5 and CentOS 5.5; however, if they have moved their buildhosts to > RHEL 5.5, and they are rebuilding packages for RHEL 5.5, that would > explain the behavior you are seeing. the discussion here seems > potentially relevant: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/2010-April/msg00008.html > and also this BZ entry: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563985 > > did you google before posting to the list? Nope. And this isn't something I have control over - this is at work, this is the way it's been set up for years, and they're not going to change it. In fact, adding the EPEL repo is part of the instructions on our wiki on setting up a new system. > > my latest information from Dag is that RPMforge is not planning to upgrade > buildhosts to 5.5 until CentOS 5.5 is out. RPMforge currently provides a > memcached-1.4.5 package that will run on CentOS 5.4, and will also run on > RHEL 5.5 with the compat-libevent-11a package (also from RPMforge). That seems reasonable to me. To rephrase, if I'm upgrading a CentOS 5.4 system, and there's no CentOS 5.5, I don't see why yum should find a 5.5 package. *shrug* If I were a repo maintainer, I would not allow this. I can't see, say, Red Hat showing a 5.6 package if only 5.5 was out. mark