On 12/12/2007, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
Amos Shapira wrote:
Context - I'd like to stick to 5.0 at least for a while until the dust around 5.1 settles down (and I'm back from holidays).
ok, so what do you mean by sticking to 5.0 ? you mean you dont want any updates at all for those machines, even if they might be security issues ?
(I also replied to David's message)
No. I'm trying to understand where does 5.0 stand now that 5.1 is out - should I abandon 5.0 and upgrade to 5.1 if I want to stick to secure, stable releases or is 5.0 going to be maintained in parallel to 5.0 for security issues?
From your response so far I suspect that it's the former (must upgrade to 5.1).
As an example - In Debian, as long as I stick to "stable" I can be sure that the only updates I receive there are for heavily tested very important bugs and security issues, so I should generally apply them.
CentOS does not follow the debian release model.
This idea is beginning to sink in :^).
I just though that RHEL/CentOS is all about providing rock-solid, tested stable releases but there are some noises on the net that the new release might be giving early adopters some rough time.
- If I read the FAQ correctly, in order to force yum to stay with 5.0
should I just manually edit /etc/redhat-release from:
CentOS release 5 (Final) to: CentOS release 5.0 (Final)
no, there is no such mention abut anything in the FAQ or anywhere else that I can find. What made you believe that changing stuff in that text file will change the repo's your machine is looking at ?
It doesn't explicitly say so but as David pointed out, http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOS5#q8 talks about the content of this file as a way to know where the system thinks it belongs to now.
I now noticed the last sentence saying "you are in the update release stream for the 5.1 series and you will not move to a newer release without making changes to the yum config.". What kind of changes does this refer to? Overriding the $releasever in the repository URL's to hard-coded "5.0" or what?
Thanks,
--Amos