On 01/31/2013 09:26 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: > Robert Moskowitz wrote: >>> As you have seen there are differences between the packages. This makes >>> the CentOS documentation worthless to you as you are not using the same >>> versions used in the documentation. >> I had hopes that the 'official' packaging would work well, particularly >> now that both are on the same release. I really wanted to do this all >> 'official' packages. I know there is nothing wrong with rpmforge, I use >> it for a number of things, just this time around for mail, I was >> shooting for 'fully supported cruft'. Shows how good that approach takes! > I'm not sure what made you think so, Oh, I don't know. Maybe that it is run under the Fedora/Redhat umbrella as a recognized SIG? :) > but epel is no more "official" than > rpmforge. It's just another third party repo. > The only "official" repos are base and updates. Perhaps CR could qualify > as semi-official... and that's it, I'ld say. > > glad Ned could help you solve your problem. I have submitted a bug report on this: 906396