Re: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-10 Thread James Kosin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Benjamin Smith wrote: | It's easy to set up a yum server. I've posted instructions for | hosting WBEL4 packages on a WBEL3 server | http://effortlessis.com/wbel4yum.html | | Why not set up a yum repo on your RPM repository, and post | announcements h

Re: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-09 Thread Benjamin Smith
It's easy to set up a yum server. I've posted instructions for hosting WBEL4 packages on a WBEL3 server http://effortlessis.com/wbel4yum.html Why not set up a yum repo on your RPM repository, and post announcements here, in a format easily recognized as such? Setup will take you an hour or so

RE: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-09 Thread Matthew Nuzum
> | > |Perhaps what I'm missing is how this is adding value to > |Fedora-legacy? > | > | > |Regards, Mike Klinke > > I don't want to add confusion, just a place to add updates for new > versions of products. > I'll refrane from posting until I straighten this mess out. > > James Kosin > Hi Jame

Re: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-09 Thread Peter J. Holzer
On 2005-08-08 10:47:51 -0500, Mike Klinke wrote: > On Monday 08 August 2005 10:40, Peter J. Holzer wrote: > > So fedora legacy includes a patched version of zlib 1.2.0.7, and > > James offers a package for zlib 1.2.3. Where's the problem? > > > And all this doesn't seem confusing? 8) The only th

Re: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-09 Thread James Kosin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike Klinke wrote: |On Monday 08 August 2005 10:55, JK wrote: | | |><<-- SNIP -->> | | | |Well, maybe it's just me, but I find that a security fix released |against a fedora-legacy supported version ( FC1 ) to fix a version |of a package that was nev

Re: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-09 Thread nigel henry
It's hardly going to be confusing as fedora legacy are not interested in updating packages to enable 3rd party apps like clamav to work. I'm not knocking Fedora Legacy, but it's nice to think that someones working on the problem. Nigel On Monday 08 Aug 2005 4:23 pm, Mike Klinke wrote: > On

Re: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-08 Thread Mike Klinke
On Monday 08 August 2005 10:55, JK wrote: > > Yes, and No at the same time. > These are repackaged versions of the ZLib package. > The version of ZLib for FC1 you have is correct... although, I > believe I've only seen one security fix in the current one. > The BUG fixes are nice; but, not a requ

Re: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-08 Thread James Kosin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike Klinke wrote: | On Monday 08 August 2005 09:21, James Kosin wrote: | |> JAMES' Unofficial Unsupported by RedHat, Redhat Fedora Core, and |> Redhat Fedora Legacy Groups! ~Any support for my packages, |> will only come from me! There is no

Re: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-08 Thread Mike Klinke
On Monday 08 August 2005 10:40, Peter J. Holzer wrote: > > Nice disclaimer. Unfortunately people don't seem to read it. Exactly .. > > Fedora Legacy has a different policy for security fixes: Patches > are generally backported to the released version, upgrades to the > newest version are avoi

Re: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-08 Thread Peter J. Holzer
On 2005-08-08 10:23:03 -0500, Mike Klinke wrote: > On Monday 08 August 2005 09:21, James Kosin wrote: > > JAMES' Unofficial Unsupported by RedHat, Redhat Fedora Core, and > > Redhat Fedora Legacy Groups! > > ~Any support for my packages, will only come from me! There > > is no bugzilla for th

Re: [FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-08 Thread Mike Klinke
On Monday 08 August 2005 09:21, James Kosin wrote: > JAMES' Unofficial Unsupported by RedHat, Redhat Fedora Core, and > Redhat Fedora Legacy Groups! > ~Any support for my packages, will only come from me! There > is no bugzilla for the packages, groups may not know what version > you are tal

[FC1] Unofficial Updates to ZLIB

2005-08-08 Thread James Kosin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 JAMES' Unofficial Unsupported by RedHat, Redhat Fedora Core, and Redhat Fedora Legacy Groups! ~Any support for my packages, will only come from me! There is no bugzilla for the packages, groups may not know what version you are talking about. T