They're prominent enough, just give us some indication that these are
indeed rpms of the latest version. The files are named 2.1.date and while
the date is recent, I wasn't assured that the date reflected the
development snapshot and not simply the date on the rpm build. Rpms are
typically behind development. Perhaps a third level version number on the
development and rpms would remove confusion.
In any case, I have, as a test, successfully compiled the source as well
as installed the rpms. Both work.
Alex Lancaster wrote:
"JH" == James Haefner <address@hidden> writes:
JH> The rpms are all clearly labeled at version 2.1 and other webpages
JH> on swarm.org clearly state that this is 2 years out of date and
JH> one should get the latest development version. I was following
JH> what I thought was the most desirable procedure given the
JH> presented data.
Right indeed, you should definitely get the latest snapshot releases,
rather than 2.1.1, but on the development snapshot page:
http://www.swarm.org/release-swarm-snapshot.html
there are links to Paul Johnson's RPMs for these snapshot releases for
Red Hat Linux 7.2 and 7.3 (under GNU/Linux binaries). Currently we
are providing just for not as many platforms as for the stable release.
If you did not notice these, perhaps we should make them more
prominent.
A.
--
James W. Haefner Email: address@hidden
Dept Biology/Ecology Center Voice: 435-797-3553
Utah State University FAX: 435-797-1575
Logan, UT 84322-5305
==================================
Swarm-Support is for discussion of the technical details of the day
to day usage of Swarm. For list administration needs (esp.
[un]subscribing), please send a message to <address@hidden>
with "help" in the body of the message.