What is interesting is that RedHat lists the file as htdig-3.2.0-7.20020505 - not a mention of the "beta" term. Must have been a typo by someone with bad eyesight who typed "-7" instead of "b4" ;-)
Now does that also mean I would have to replace htdig-web since it has the same release numbers on the RedHat site as htdig? (I cannot seem find them on the web.)
What is also interesting is that it appears that RedHat used htdig-3.2b3 and then b4 to index the KDE help files in release 7.1 but not 7.2. Might they have "stabilized" it or is that against the rules without sharing that stabilization? I think I keep playing with it for now. Haven't gone production yet.
Paul
At 12:17 PM -0500 2/9/03, Jon Carnes wrote:
Having been through this recently at a site I help out on, I can attest that for us, the drop back to HTDig 3.1.6 (away from the 3.2.b4) was well worth the effort.[...] It's interesting that Red Hat should push the beta out on a production release. I found it to be of less than production quality and highly recommend that you remove v3.2.b4 and install v3.1.6 of HTDig. [...] On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 19:53, Paul Kleeberg wrote: >Just so you know, it is in the standard "everything" install of the cheapest CD version of 8.0 but looking at the bottom of the search result page on my newly htdigged site, I see:> ht://Dig 3.2.0b4-20020505
-- Paul Kleeberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: archive@jab.org Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
