Re: F7 Kernel 2.6.22.1-33.fc7 USB stick

On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 17:17 +0100, Chris Jones wrote:

I'm not disagreeing with you about Scientific Linux, which I haven't used,
but CentOS 4 recently had a very large major upgrade from 4.4 to 4.5, which
I, as a new CentOS user hoping for the non-upgrade kind of stability, found
rather upsetting. I was told that CentOS just follows RedHat, which had
just done that to RHEL 4. Is Scientific Linux different?

Sure, Scientific Linux has various different majors versions that are
currently SL3 and SL4 (SL5 on the way). These are based on EL3 and EL4
and very different beasts. You won't find yourself going from SL3 to SL4
via yum, unless you choose to try and do that.

For sure though SL also has sub-point releases, 3.x and 4.x (currently I
am on a 4.5 release), which I think are the equivalents of what you talk
about above. These updates I believe can occur through yum. However,
I've not aware of any problems in this, its always been pretty flawless.
I'm not the sys-admin though, but I never heard him complain (and I
suspect I would have) or noticed any problems as a user.

maybe SL is better than centos in this regard ?

I don't know, but I doubt it. Both distros are intended to track RHEL
pretty much exactly. The upgrade to a new point release usually
involves just installing a rather large number of bugfix updates to
existing packages.

I recall some discussion from Red Hat of possibly retaining old point
releases and issuing only security updates for them so that users
wouldn't have to do the point release thing if they didn't want to.
That is, one could maintain a RHEL 4.2 system and still get security
updates even though RHEL 4.5 is current. I don't know where that stands
at this point, though.


Chris


--
Matthew Saltzman

Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Relevant Pages

  • Re: fedora or centos?
    ... >> For Whitebox there are update servers, I'm sure CentOS has update servers ... >> commercial vendors will guarantee that their product works on RHEL. ... > updates might be released significantly slower than for FC or RHEL. ... I have one Whitebox installation which I used to ...
    (linux.redhat.misc)
  • Re: WhiteBox Linux
    ... CentOS is the primary RHEL clone now. ... Scientific Linux is also a RHEL ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: Using centos updates for RHEL (project spacewalk)
    ... I've been looking for information about the compatibility of CentOS ... updates issued from CentOS directly onto my RHEL machines. ... I think you need to pay the man and get your updates from Red Hat. ... Or switch over wholesale to CentOS, and accept the lack of direct Red Hat ...
    (linux.redhat)
  • Re: Fedora home server using core 9
    ... everyone already pointed out that both SL and CentOS are almost identical ... This means the following --- in the future, RHEL and derivatives ... RHEL clone, and *require* all grid sites to use it, in order to have control ... over what updates get pushed to them, ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: How to upgrade Fedora from v10 to v11?
    ... On a server you don't run a GUI most of the time so you won't ... The only problem with CentOS on desktop hardware is ... I use CentOS 5.3 VMs to run commercial applications that require RHEL. ... So, assuming they pick up updates from Fedora, they will be backported into the original code; they will not substitute a later release because there are too many problems that could come up with other packages, some not supplied by Red Hat. ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)