On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Stainforth, Matthew (SD/DS) <[email protected]> wrote: >> Stainforth, Matthew (SD/DS) wrote: > The low priority and loose ETA seemed paradoxical to me considering the fact > that 5.5 was released and this bug > cripples the use of RHN for more than a handful of patches. That is why I > reached out to the list to see who else > besides us might be hurting from it. > > I'm hoping it gets some traction soon since our RHEL 5.5 upgrade for > unfortunately shelved until then.
To be fair we find it more of an annoyance than anything else. You can and we have updated to 5.5 using methods other than scheduled errata via RHN. Any other method works fine. rhn_check does have some advantages over using yum directly when dealing with large volumes of updates though. John _______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
