I'm still running Core 4 and the new DST is coming at me like a freight train. I got the latest src for Core 5: tzdata-2006p-1 and built it and installed it so I now have tzdata-2006-1 on my system.
% > rpm -q tzdata-2006p tzdata-2006p-1
The problem is:
% > date -d '27 March' Tue Mar 27 00:00:00 EST 2007
Note that it says EST instead of EDT. I have no TZ variable set.
Can someone *please* tell what I have to do to fix this?
TIA
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 03:18:33PM -0500, Steven W. Orr wrote:
I'm still running Core 4 and the new DST is coming at me like a freight train. I got the latest src for Core 5: tzdata-2006p-1 and built it and installed it so I now have tzdata-2006-1 on my system.
% > rpm -q tzdata-2006p tzdata-2006p-1
The problem is:
% > date -d '27 March' Tue Mar 27 00:00:00 EST 2007
Note that it says EST instead of EDT. I have no TZ variable set.
Can someone *please* tell what I have to do to fix this?
FC4 glibc didn't have /usr/sbin/tzdata-update (it was only introduced in FC5+ and later backported to RHEL4 and RHEL3). So, after you update tzdata package, if the changes are in your default timezone, you need to return system-config-date or manually update /etc/localtime.
Jakub
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 03:18:33PM -0500, Steven W. Orr wrote:
I'm still running Core 4 and the new DST is coming at me like a freight train. I got the latest src for Core 5: tzdata-2006p-1 and built it and installed it so I now have tzdata-2006-1 on my system.
Instead of rebuilding, you should install this and all the other updates from Fedora Legacy. (And then, as mentioned earlier, for the love of sanity, upgrade to a supported release as soon as possible.)
On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 15:37 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 03:18:33PM -0500, Steven W. Orr wrote:
I'm still running Core 4 and the new DST is coming at me like a freight train. I got the latest src for Core 5: tzdata-2006p-1 and built it and installed it so I now have tzdata-2006-1 on my system.
Instead of rebuilding, you should install this and all the other updates from Fedora Legacy. (And then, as mentioned earlier, for the love of sanity, upgrade to a supported release as soon as possible.)
I thought legacy was now defunct? But yes. Even though I didn't want to (don't fix what is working fine), I did finally upgrade my last fc4 machine, a headless server that does imap, caching nameserver, mysql, and a few other things for my lan. I would have preferred to keep it fc4 and use legacy, but I heard legacy was dead project, so I spent a day upgrading and setting everything up again. I guess I'll have to repeat a month or two after FC8 is released.
-=-
btw - if legacy is dead, it would be nice to not lose FC updates until two months old and a couple months, even if the only updates pushed are security fixes.
For "utility" type boxes, the latest FC is really not necessary except when no more updates are pushed, and upgrading those boxes can be time consuming, so sometimes I like to wait until a release is a month old and bad things have been discovered and fixed. I bet I'm not the only one. Knowing there will be security fixes for two versions old would be a comfort while waiting, especially since purpose of these boxes is to have open ports.
Michael A Peters wrote:
I thought legacy was now defunct?
Yes, legacy is defunct. But installing whatever updates are available is better than not installing them...
btw - if legacy is dead, it would be nice to not lose FC updates until two months old and a couple months, even if the only updates pushed are security fixes.
Do you mean "two years old and a couple of months"? You probably want RHEL or Centos.
Do you mean two releases and a couple of months? The plan, I understand, is that FC5 will be supported until a month after F7 is released, which should be close enough...
For "utility" type boxes, the latest FC is really not necessary except when no more updates are pushed, and upgrading those boxes can be time consuming, so sometimes I like to wait until a release is a month old and bad things have been discovered and fixed. I bet I'm not the only one. Knowing there will be security fixes for two versions old would be a comfort while waiting, especially since purpose of these boxes is to have open ports.
Seriously, that's the sort of use for which RHEL or CentOS is suited -- set it up, set up updates, and forget it.
James.
-
Jakub Jelinek -
James Wilkinson -
Matthew Miller -
Michael A. Peters -
Steven W. Orr