RH RPM Naming Scheme?

[llbbl]

Ok there is a recent PHP security update right. Here it is.

http://www.linuxsecurity.com/content/view/119015/110/

They tell you to update your RPM to this version. I have replaced some of the name to indicate their different naming schemes depending on what processor you have.

php-4.3.2-23.XXXXXX.rpm

Does this mean that the version of php that they want you to upgrade to is 4.3.2 ? I don't understand what the "2-23" means.

I am not running php off a RPM install, I did a custom build from the binary files that are available on the PHP site. http://www.php.net/downloads.php#v4

I just want to understand what RH is doing better. The current version 4 of PHP is 4.3.11. That is far from the 4.3.2 that I think RH wants you to install. Maybe the RH rpm naming scheme does not correlate directly with the releases of PHP.

[openbsd-flipp]

php-4.3.2-23.XXXXXX.rpm

Does this mean that the version of php that they want you to upgrade to is 4.3.2 ? I don't understand what the "2-23" means.

the 23 is for the ultra minor bug fixes that are released. These are used to build up features and bug fxes slowly so that a new minor release will not crash the whole thing and so that any bugs in the fix will be easier to spot.

[llbbl]

how come RH or the PHP developers make a 4.3.11 RPM? Why are they so behind?

[openbsd-flipp]

They don't make dedicated RPMS for every minor package change unless it is to fix a security issue. The ammount of customizing that is done with every package is insanely large so they only release new versions if they have to. Besides think of how big the code is just for PHP and how many developers are on just that one package. There is a f$ckton of people that support the distribution as a whole but there is also several gigs of available software that has to be checked to see if each package works and can resolve dependicy hell. Also with new versions of every package being released daily in some cases it is a loosing battle to get all the software to work.

[dang]

thats why there needs to be a better install/uinstall universal system in place.

[openbsd-flipp]

there are 2 simple updaters that do not break thinks, apt-get and emerge

[dang]

yes, but not everyone distrubutes their applications via apt.

If I have X distro and I find some cool application, like a webmail server that is closed source, I most likely have to use a precompiled binary which hopefully at most has a command line based installer, or I have to figure out how to install the thing using the readme.

Thats one thing missing is a simple, gui or command based universal installer that is not network reliant. You download the software, run it and it goes through a wizard type install without cryptic errors if it happens to fail.

[llbbl]

besides apt-get like up2date requires you to use packages, not custom complied from source programs. it is pratically impossible to get a LAMP system up and running on standard packages because there is always some depandcy that is needed.

[openbsd-flipp]

FreeBSD has got it right with "pkg_add -r <package name>". Anything in the ports tree has a package and since there is a full metric ton of ports you whould have damn neer anything needed to run what ever you want to