On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
WRT the age of RHEL ... that is what enterprise Linux is. Fedora (or Ubuntu non LTS, or opensuse, or Debian SID, or any number of other alternatives) exist if you don't want the more stable (ie, older) items.
Again, nothing wrong with their approach (I like Troy in any dealings we have had), however it is not what CentOS does or is going to do. When we release, we basically loose meaningful access to our machines for a week as dozens of internal servers, hundreds of external mirrors, and millions of individual machines get updated.
1) With industry experts saying things like
"It's fundamentally wrong for RedHat to attempt to backport security patches for such a fundamental service. I'd cuss a blue streak about this point, in fact, except that I don't want to trigger the anti-cuss features at Dr. Vaughn's place of employment."
I think I'll continue with the effort to get RedHat to see the wisdom wrt certain essential elements of the Internet infrastructure (like BIND).
2) Further, I think I'll continue with RedHat/CentOS/SL because I have the layout of the file system memorized, if for no other reason. Too much time on "where did they put that?" in Ubuntu/Debian/et al. Yeah, I should probably stress the 64 year old neurons with memorizing the Ubuntu file structure, but then I wouldn't have time to post remarks like these, including prodding the CentOS team to follow Browning and "grasp beyond their reach." :)
kind regards/ldv