G'day Mark, On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Post, Mark K wrote:
> Because if they don't, then they'll get the same complaints that Red Hat has > been getting with RHEL3: > Q - Why isn't the so-and-so RPM included in RHEL any more? > A - It isn't supported, so we took it out. It's never been supported but we > kept having to tell people that over, and over, and over again. > Q - Well, I understand that it's not supported, but I don't want to have to > build it myself. Can't you put it back in? > > It's a no-win situation for the distribution creators. Sure: I don't envy the job of the distribution maintainers! But what if the dropped package means that the customer loses functionality? We had exactly this scenario recently: dhcpcd was dropped between RH 7.2 and RHEL 3.0, to be replaced by dhclient. Okay, fine, at one stage RH was supporting at least three DHCP client packages and wanted to pick one to go forward with. However, dhclient does not support the "broadcast reply flag" that is required for DHCP to work on a Guest LAN. Dropping that package means that out-of-the-box, a RHEL 3.0 guest cannot use DHCP on a Guest LAN -- which is especially ironic because the installer in RHEL 3.0 now gives us the option of configuring interfaces using DHCP! The support aspect is a different angle. I would have assumed, like many, that whatever was on the CDs would get some level of support by the distro vendor. If that's not -- was never -- the case, I can understand the desire to rationalise the packages lists so that such an assurance could be given in the future. I agree that it's a no-win situation, but can't help but think that it needs to be managed better. Sorry guys! :-) Hoo-roo, Vic Cross
