Building & Installing on Red Hat Systems (Was: Make error - Solved)

Alan DeKok aland at
Tue Dec 2 11:10:57 CET 2008

Jos Vos wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 10:47:08AM +0100, Alan DeKok wrote:
>>   It should be easier for *new* installs to use 2.x.  Otherwise, they
>> install the "latest" RHEL version, and then get told to upgrade.
> This is unrealistic.  How should RH maintain a "sliding" base?

  I didn't say "include new software with old RHEL versions".  I said
"easier to install new software".

  The RedHat FAQ page on the Wiki helps with that.

>  And what
> does "RHEL5" mean if the version you have installed depends on the time
> of installation?  And what about large customers having many servers
> installed and now install another one (with a different version)?

  If that's what they do... then that's what they get.  It's *their*
problem.  It's not *our* problem, and it's not a *RedHat* problem.

> Note that I have chosen myself to run a new(er) version of FreeRADIUS
> on an installed base of RHEL4 servers, by "backporting" a recent Fedora
> src.rpm to RHEL4.  So I *do* see the need in some situations for having
> a new version.  But that's not the fault of Red Hat, it's just the way
> it works.

  Yes... and the people who *can't* backport the spec files have been
asking a lot of questions on this list.  Hence the RedHat FAQ on the Wiki.

  Alan DeKok.

More information about the Freeradius-Users mailing list