lør, 2002-09-14 kl. 00:26 skrev Caylan Van Larson: > WHAT!!! > Please now someone explain to me how the bleeping versions are laid out? > I wanted the latest 2.0 branch and settled for 2.0.9 (largest digit..?) > How wrong I was, why is the naming so weird on there? There must be some > convention that I do not know of. Quite apart from what Matthew and Harry Rüter wrote, and as a confirmed Red Hat user, I'd add my 2 EroCents' worth by saying, that what Red Hat lays out - even the latest stuff - is mostly months out of date and (if you like to keep up with SANS and CERT, as well as the Joneses) horribly suspect. If there's ever a question about reliable versions, make sure you use the latest stable source and *compile and configure your own*. Especially all critical stuff, such as *all* software exposed to the Internet and *all* databases and their ilk. That's certainly the case for Openldap, which has one of the highest update frequencies out there. You really should be using 2.1.x, with the BDB 4 libraries. As far as the 2.96 GCC version is concerned, all you have to do is to go to the gcc site and see what is said there and how the people there slag off Red Hat for ever including it. In fact, if you ever have to compile c++ stuff with 2.96, you'll invariably get segmentation faults, which magically go away with gcc 3.0 and higher. And make no mistake - I've only ever found one old source package out there that won't compile with 3.0.x. I use Red Hat and Ximian rpms for all non-critical software, but *everything* critical is hand-compiled and configured. It's honestly worth the hassle. Best, Tony -- Tha can allway tell a Yorkshireman, but tha canna tell 'im much. e-post: tonni@billy.demon.nl www: http://www.billy.demon.nl gpg public key: http://www.billy.demon.nl/tonni.armor Telefoon: (+31) (0)172 530428 Mobiel: (+31) (0)6 51153356 GPG Fingerprint = 3924 6BF8 A755 DE1A 4AD6 FA2B F7D7 6051 3BE7 B981 3BE7B981
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dette er en digitalt signert meldingsdel