On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Dave Carlson wrote:
> You're in a bit of a corner here. CentOS/RHEL is designed not to have
> the cutting-edge software and instead is centered on version stability,
> like all enterprise distributions are.
Bingo. RHEL/CentOS are (IMO) good at what they do, Fedora is good at
what it does. Mixing and matching gets a little problematic unless you're
a packaging guru.
> Virtually anything you do to bolt on the newer sendmail will send you
> into version-dependency hell (see last sentence for why) or be done
> outside the package management system and will be overwritten when
> CentOS/RHEL updates sendmail and potentially cause other runtime
> problems.
You're half right here, except CentOS 4 will never update sendmail as far
as 8.14. Heck, even CentOS 5 is only up to 8.13.8; it'd probably be until
5.1 or 6 before it gets close to endangering the RPM, and even then,
that'd probably be what he'd want (unless he's patching in extra
functionality, which he hasn't mentioned).
Just an off-the-cuff guess; the Fedora 7 sendmail SRPM probably has a
BuildReq for tcp_wrappers-devel. tcp_wrapper-devel was split off between
FC6 and F7 -- before F7, the functionality was in the main tcp_wrappers
RPM. Removing that -devel might get past that hurdle (although another
one might take its place).
> Definitely don't try what ESR did and try to fight rpm (--force --nodeps)
> - I guarantee it will win :)
Number one rule if you're thinking about using --force or --nodeps:
You're probably doing something wrong.
Jima