On 1/17/2012 4:08 AM, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, Evan Cooch wrote:
>
>> This is the version supported by Redhat, and CentOS (which is a
>> binary-level clone of RHEL). People (like me) use RH, or CentOS, for
>> stability. If you're saying that 7.15.5 is broken, then its broken
>> for RHEL 5.x (and clones), which I would find surprising, given RH's
>> market share on the 'corporate supported' side of GNU/Linux.
>
> Then I consider you surprised. But that won't help anything. Both RHEL
> and CentOS are *conservative* above many other virtues so you won't
> get good and modern things, you get old and stable (of course this is
> my subjective opinion, I'm sure both of those teams will use other
> ways to desribe their approaches). curl 7.15.5 is old and stable. But
> it also has lots of bugs and quirks we've fixed since then. And
> truthfully, that's just about how ALL software you have in those old
> installations work.
>
>> Again, short of compiling from source, not a simple due. The only
>> version of curl in the RHEL/CentOS repos is the one I'm using. I can
>> compile from source, but that is general discouraged since that
>> sometimes breaks things.
>
> Why would it break anything? You shouldn't blindly replace what you
> have but simply install a new version in parallell as a test just to
> see if the new version works or not. After you've tested it you can
> decide how to proceed, but I would still recommend you then have them
> in parallell to avoid a larger RPM mess.
>

I ended up compiling from source. Didn't change the basic 'symptoms' of
the problem.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-users
FAQ: http://curl.haxx.se/docs/faq.html
Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
Received on 2012-01-17