On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 11:58:43 +0100 Karanbir Singh <mail-li...@karan.org> wrote:
> On 04/11/2011 12:46 AM, Bob Hepple wrote: > > Oh well, so much for that idea! According to the release notes > > (http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS5.6) there is a list > > of packages modified by centos - and that includes httpd. So the > > absence of 'centos' in the release string does _not_ mean that the > > package is unmodified (ie it's merely re-built). > > you said httpd but looked at rpm :) hoo boy, I got myself into a right muddle. So OK - if it has 'centos' in the release number, then there were changes from upstream - otherwise you can use the upstream vendors source package!!! Phew, glad someone around here has their head screwed on - thanks for setting me right, KB!! While I'm here - thanks to the whole CentOS team for a great effort on 5.6. I installed it on a laptop for the wife and she loves it!! For myself - once I've the sources get here I can start our patch and re-compile for our in-house discless clusters. Cheers Bob -- Bob Hepple <bhep...@promptu.com> ph: 07-5584-5908 Fx: 07-5575-9550 _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
