From: "Les Mikesell" <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> > Failing to do this is going to leave a huge number of machines > vulnerable to future security problems even if they had been > set up to do automatic updates. That's not a good thing for > a distribution's reputation. Letting the Fedora team change > focus as planned makes sense. Forcing all users to make a > manual configuration change in something that was supposed > to help them avoid manual work doesn't make sense. Every time a server is running fine and up2date , the current running release on the server is going to legacy state and shortly a lot repo's are stopping with that branche. I do run FC3 on some production servers out of the country in a datacenter. I do not want to do live upgrades on such machines and i dont want to go buy a airplane ticket :) It just pitty that RH choosed for this policy. Why not 1 fedora and just 1 repo and mirrors and update the packages? I see a new RH release as a updated release with newest versions of packages. So why not create something as "yum updaterelease" so it gets the "new" version. I am staying with all my boxes at FC3. Its running fine, better than FC1 and 2. Since packages are packaged from the opensource versions and the FC3 repo's going to be closed in future then i do uninstall the package that needs a update and install it from the orginal source tarballs. Just simple and up2date are the boxes. I liked RH and FC much because the easy way of packages installing. I get more and more and more knowlegde of linux. That means that i like other distro's much more now because they use the orginal source tarballs in their repo's. And the FC3 kernel... verry pitty that is stucks on 2.6.12. Whats the problem to pump it to latest kernel? depencies? put them into the repo too right hehe We shall see, some time if i buy new HW it stucks becuase the kernel is too old.. Anyway have fun :) Danny
