On 4 September 2011 16:39, Yury V. Zaytsev <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, 2011-09-03 at 17:15 -0700, Todd And Margo Chester wrote: > >> In days of yesteryear, I use to post bugs on Firefox security exploits >> on Red Hat's bugzilla and ask them to backport or upgrade Firefox to >> cover them. They never did either. I give up. > > I am still not convinced that these were valid reports in the first > place.
In all honesty, Yury, if a user of RHEL, Scientific Linux or CentOS needs to constantly install the latest "whizzo" version of Firefox or Thunderbird that Mozilla has just pushed out, then the wrong OS distribution is being used. As you, me and many others know, Red Hat back-port all that is relevant and necessary to the versions that they ship. There is nothing "wrong" with Firefox 3.6.20 shipped with RHEL 6u1. Essentially, this whole discussion is an irrelevance on any Repoforge mailing list. There is no problem using any packages provided by Repoforge. The Repoforge packages are designed for RHEL and its clone OSes. If a user insists on modifying the OS structure from that which is distributed, then that user must resolve the problems of her / his making and not expect a third party repository to (incorrectly) modify the packages it provides to "agree" with her / his "hacked" OS. In essence, this was what Jim Perrin tried to impart earlier in this thread. Alan. _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.repoforge.org/mailman/listinfo/users
