[Mimedefang] Re: "Please try again later"

Les Mikesell les at futuresource.com
Sun Sep 11 18:34:30 EDT 2005

On Sun, 2005-09-11 at 15:45, ADNET Ghislain wrote:
> >What _are_ you looking at?  RHEL4 (and thus Centos4) shipped with
> >Mysql 4.x eons ago; current versions are mysql-4.1.10a-2.RHEL4.1
> >and spamassassin-3.0.4-1.el4.
> >  
> >
> the license i have are REHL3, if they have those version in REHL4 i 
> don't see what can prevent them to have the same version  in RH3
> or at least to the option of using the two version, RHE3 is lacking all 
> those. 

The point of the long-maintained 'enterprise' versions is that
the applications are never upgraded full version numbers or
to anything that would have any behavior changes.  All
support is done by backporting bug and security fixes
to the applications so you can apply the updates with
no surprises. 

> I will have to see if the repository of the 4 can be 
> crossported/used with the 3.

If you want applications newer than what came with
3, you should update to 4.  If you don't like the
no-surprises philosophy, you can go to Fedora instead
where the whole distro shifts to the latest available
apps frequently. That approach is good for desktop
software which is still evolving rapidly, but Linux
server apps have been solid and feature-complete for

> For the Debian the package are in the 
> stable branch, i use only stable at the moment, as in
> FreeBSD those are  in the standard port tree.

When did that happen?  I've never been able to make any
sense out of the Debian upgrade schedule.

> Thanks for the enlightment about REHL4 i have not a good
> experience in RedHat and all i have seen is not to bring 
> me further in this product,

I can't think of anything MimeDefang related that wouldn't
work with an out-of-the-box RHEL3 system and have continued
to work up to the current set of updates.  Can you be more
specific about what it is missing?  As I mentioned, I'm
running mine on Centos 3 which should be essentially the

>  i will have to see about REHL4 then but it 
> make me wonder why we pay those licenses if our system
> become so quickly obsolete. Time for an "upgrade" of some systems :)

What you are paying for is the effort of backporting the needed
updates to older app revs so you don't have to go through the
pain of changing your own stuff to deal with whatever the
developers thought might be fun to change wildly in the
next version and the untested code that comes along with it.

If you don't want to pay, the Centos4 rebuild is fine too,
and in some cases even better because they add back some
stuff currently in Fedora but removed from RHEL4. The other
part you pay for is support in making things work so they
take out some marginal things like firewire and some of
the filesystems.  Centos4 has a rebuilt 'unsupported' kernel
with this stuff included if you want it.

  Les Mikesell
    les at futuresource.com

More information about the MIMEDefang mailing list