Asterisk RPMs for F14?

[Steven Haigh]

Looking at the repos, it seems 1.6.2.12-0.1.rc1 is the available version.

It looks like on asterisk.org, the latest version is 1.6.2.17-rc1.

How would we go about updating the available asterisk version?

-- 
Steven Haigh

Email: netwiz(a)crc.id.au
Web: http://www.crc.id.au
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:28:20 +1100
Steven Haigh <netwiz(a)crc.id.au&gt; wrote:

>  Looking at the repos, it seems 1.6.2.12-0.1.rc1 is the available
>  version.
>  
>  It looks like on asterisk.org, the latest version is 1.6.2.17-rc1.
>  
>  How would we go about updating the available asterisk version? 
This looks like something more for the users or devel list than here?

In any case, your best bet is to file a RFE (request for enhancement)
bug against the package and ask for the update. There the maintainer
can explain why it is or is not possible and what the timeframe might
be. ;) 

kevin

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

> >>>> "SH" == Steven Haigh
> <netwiz(a)crc.id.au&gt; writes: 
SH> Looking at the repos, it seems 1.6.2.12-0.1.rc1 is the available
SH> version. 

Seems to me the latest available version in the repository is 1.8.0.

SH> How would we go about updating the available asterisk version?

In a stable release?  I'd assume that the maintainer would need to
balance any benefits against the disruption such an update could cause.
I'm assuming you can provide some benefits besides "the version number
is higher".  And of course, it would be far more helpful if you would
provide that list of benefits in a ticket filed against the package
instead of on a mailing list.

 - J<

[Michal Jaegermann]

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 03:44:44PM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>  >>>>> "SH" == Steven Haigh
> <netwiz(a)crc.id.au&gt; writes:
>  
>  SH> Looking at the repos, it seems 1.6.2.12-0.1.rc1 is the available
>  SH> version. 
>  
>  Seems to me the latest available version in the repository is 1.8.0. 
Actually 1.8.2.2.  But in 1.6... series this would apparently be
1.6.2.16.1 ("stable" and not "rc").  Asterisk maintains 1.4 series
too.

>  In a stable release?  I'd assume that the maintainer would need
> to
>  balance any benefits against the disruption such an update could cause.
>  I'm assuming you can provide some benefits besides "the version number
>  is higher". 
Closing assorted security holes would likely qualify as a benefit.
There were various advisories from a time when 1.6.2.12-0.1.rc1
showed up, with the last one AST-2011-001 dated Tue, 01/18/2011 -
10:41 ( http://www.asterisk.org/node/51557 ), and it does not seem
likely that an old "rc1" release was not affected.

   Michal