Felix Schwarz wrote: > No Fedora 5: > I did not build RPMs for Fedora 5 because the Fedora Project eol'd this > version > of Fedora at the end of June [1]. If you are still using Fedora 5 (or even > older > versions) IMHO you should switch either to new versions of Fedora or use > CentOS > if you need longer support cycles. However, if enough users demand FC5 > packages, > I'm willing to build them at least for 2.2.4.
Sourceforge shows that your version 2.0.3 for fedora 5 had: 312 downloads for the client, 221 downloads for mysql, 130 downloads for postgre, and 140 downloads for sqlite for a total of 803 (combining i386 and x86_64). I don't think it is at all unusual to have a dedicated backup server on a protected network running an EOL version of fedora. Also, the official rpms still support fedora 4 (which I still use, I'm embarrassed to admit). In any event, thanks for your contributions. Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
