A request for RedHat 8.0 continued support...

[Ingo T. Storm]

> > I did a rough comparison between Aurora (7.3 based) and Panama (RHEL
> > 2.1): the difference is smaller than you'd think. I need both, I will
> > help supporting and thus I'd vote for both.

Sorry for being unclear. I meant I'd vote for both 7.2 and 7.3. I also
wanted to say that the backporting work for these two will probably be less
than expected, because there is a larger overlap between 7.2, 7.3 and
RHEL2.1 than you'd think. To be more precise:

When I thought about what to do with my Aurora 1.0 boxes I compiled a
"typical minimum rpm set" from my servers that run Aurora. I then compared
this list to what is currently in Panama (RHEL2.1). I removed the kernel and
his close friends (modutils, util-linux) and the toolchain from the list for
obvious reasons. Then I put the srpms in groups :

- Aurora only: 4 srpms.
- Aurora has same software version as RHEL, rpm release is higher or the
same (sed 3.0.2-11 vs. 3.0.2-10): 77
- Aurora has newer software version, but difference is minor (e.g. bzip2
1.0.2 vs 1.0.1): 34
- Aurora has completely different software version (e.g. gmp 4.0.1 vs
3.1.1): 22

Since I looked at servers, the "notorius" packages (openssh, bind, apache)
are on my list. They are all in the "uncritical" group and most of them BTW
share the same srpm for 7.2, 7.3 and RHEL already.

Know grains of salt:

- I only skimmed through the stuff quickly in order to assess if my little
project is viable at all. There might be incompatibilitities in stuff that I
consider "uncritical".
- I only looked at what I need for a small server. Removed everything I
don't absolutely need. No X, no gui whatsover. For being helpful for
FedoraLegacy the list would have to be redone by at least two people with
experience in using 7.2/7.3 on a desktop.

I hope this has clarified my post.

And while we're at it: I hereby sign for the combo "7.2 and 7.3". I cannot
sign for just one of them.

Ingo