[CentOS] Re: core 2 duo motherboards and centos 4

[Johnny Hughes]

On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 13:05 +0100, Theo Band wrote:
> 
> > > btw, if you're particularly keen to stat at about the RHL 7.3 level then 
> > > CentOS 2.1 is close, CentOS 3 is close to FC1 (I think) and CentOS 4 is 
> > > a good match for FC3.
> > > 
> > > Note, "good match" is less than "perfect match." Making it work may 
> > > require some skill:-)
> > >     
> > 
> > Those are the correct FC versions as a basis for the CentOS releases,
> > yes.
> >   
> What about Centos4.4 is that similar to FC4/RHEL4? Actually I want to
> have the version closest to RHEL4.

CentOS 4.4 is just an updated CentOS 4.0 which is based on the upstream
SourceRPMS for RHEL4.  CentOS 4 is the version, 4.4 indicates update set
4 for CentOS 4.  See this link for details:

http://www.centos.org/modules/smartfaq/faq.php?faqid=34

The upstream SourceRPMS for EL4 were based on FC3 (or at least the
snapshot that they started with was based on FC3 ... obviously the
resulting distros are very different (rhel4 and fc3).

In basic terms, here is the upstream process.

There is a development area (formally known as rawhide ... and I still
will call it that frequently).  Rawhide moves forward all the time,
getting new RPMS that are added on an almost daily basis.  It is very
similar to the debian unstable (SID) line.

At a point in time, they will freeze a snapshot and call that the RH9,
FC1, FC2, FC3, FC4, FC5, FC6, Fedora7, etc. snapshot.

Also, normally one of those snapshots is also a basis for an EL version.
(Usually every 3rd one)

So ... 

FC7
FC6 -> RHEL5
FC5
FC4
FC3 -> RHEL4
FC2
FC1
RH9 -> RHEL3
RH8
RH7.3
RH7.2 -> RHEL2
RH7.1
RH7

One can then project that that RHEL6 would be based on the FC9 code,
etc.

Also, there is sometimes a mixing of the code (as in ... some FC1 stuff
made it into the RHEL3 code, some FC4 stuff made it into the RHEL4 code
{mysql4 as an example}, etc.)

As far as CentOS goes, our goal is to use the Enterprise Source code
(ie, the source code produced for RHEL and not the source code produced
for FC) ... however, it is nice to know where that code comes from.

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20070122/18d3a2f5/attachment.sig>