On Sun, 2004-02-08 at 11:57, Bart Martens wrote: > > Also, compairing one release to another doesn't make sense. RHL 9 has had > > kernel updates that FC 1 didn't need because it was already patched. > > Are you denying the problem? Are you saying that fc1 is kept up to date > just as fast as rh9? It is just as fast. > https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh9-errata.html > http://fedoranews.org/updates/ The fedoranews.org updates is created manually, so there might be a delay in time from rh9's errata till the fedoranews.org updates feed catches on. There was a call for jobs (aka FedoraJobs) to get this fixed. Read: http://fedoranews.org/colin/fnu/week4.shtml -- Colin Charles, byte@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.bytebot.net/ http://fedoranews.org/colin/fnu/ - Fedora News Updates
