[CentOS-devel] Why not a fusion between CentOS and SL?
wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro
Wed Mar 23 10:09:10 UTC 2011
On 03/23/2011 12:00 PM, carlopmart wrote:
> On 03/23/2011 10:52 AM, John R. Dennison wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 10:46:21AM +0100, carlopmart wrote:
>>> I know that SL includes some custom components like OpenAFS in their
>>> distribution, but base system is the same as CentOS. Then, I repeat, why
>> Because unless something has changed SL does not profess to be
>> binary compatible with upstream
> Are you sure?? What does it means "binary compatible" for you??
binary compatible means that ALL dependencies are identical. each and
> To me it means that the software "foo" works perfectly on both distros.
if you examine certain packages you will notice that there are linking
differences between what SL ships and what RH ships.
> And all the software I've tried, commercial and GNU, it works in both
> distributions with the same mistakes and equally effective and performance.
You'll be surprised how subtle differences can influence programs
behaviour. My colleagues investigated for half a week a <2 second
difference for the execution time of a commercial application ( we are
beta testing ) when using a specific test scenario.
More information about the CentOS-devel