[CentOS-devel] Why not a fusion between CentOS and SL?
ssilva at sgvwater.com
Thu Mar 24 15:40:57 UTC 2011
on 3/23/2011 3:00 AM Ljubomir Ljubojevic spake the following:
> carlopmart wrote:
>> On 03/23/2011 10:27 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>>> Scientific Linux uses upstream source to create their own repo, without
>>> desire to be 100% compatible.
>>> CentOS project is dedicated to provide (as close as possible) 100%
>>> compatibility. It's not just a rebuild of upstream sources, goal is tu
>>> *duplicate* RHEL.
>>> It's that simple. And this was answer many times in this and other
>>> mailing lists, forum threads....
>> 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
> Then, I repeat, because SL *does not care* to build 100% *binary*
> compatible packages, fo r CentOS it's a must.
> Look at it this way. Upstream is a Coca-Cola Co. SL is Pepsi. They use
> publicly available formulas from upstream in order to create product
> that is as good as upstreams, but is not *the 100% same* since their
> production formulas are not ***100%/absolutely*** the same.
> In this analogy, CentOS is the industrial espionage guy who constantly
> steals new formulas from upstream in order to create **exact/100%**
> replicas of upstream product. For better analogy, lets say that
> acquiring that formula is illegal.
> So, how do you propose that Pepsi and counterfeit work together.
> P.S. "counterfeit" is extremely wrong to say for CentOS, but analogy
> demands clear distinction of persons involved, so I beg all to forgive
> me for this.
It would be more like, CentOS uses freely available list of ingredients, but
without the secret recipe. So they work and work until the end product is as
close as humanly possible. SL takes those ingredients and when they get "close
enough" they say "done!"
I say if anyone thinks SL is better... Don't let the virtual door hit you in
the nethers on your way out... If you want CentOS... Just be patient. Getting
4.9 and 5.6 working first was a good and valid decision, as a new deployment
of a new and untested distro is usually lower on the priority list anyway. The
unpaid and overworked staff is working as fast as they can...
More information about the CentOS-devel