Hi all
Just joined this list. Am presently a whitebox 4 & FC 3 user. Have some questions about this distro...hope someone...maybe the list-owner or the power centers in this list will deign to reply ;-)
- Site seems to say...Basic Centos will remain same as RHEL...is that absolute code/binary /naming & path compatibility? Is this for ever. ConfirmedDDD?
- Somewhere else it says addons will be there....again sure that these will be seperate in extras but will keep the RHEL conventions? ConfirmedDDD?
- Now about creating a local repository...I create a local repository of all software I use and other computers installed in our company can use. At this time we are charged by the MB, so can't be public. So what repository do I rsync with? East US woulb be best for me...but I don't think I should hog on layer 1 repositories...so please do guide.
On Sat, 2005-05-28 at 23:35 +0530, Sanjay Arora wrote:
Hi all
Just joined this list. Am presently a whitebox 4 & FC 3 user. Have some questions about this distro...hope someone...maybe the list-owner or the power centers in this list will deign to reply ;-)
- Site seems to say...Basic Centos will remain same as RHEL...is that
absolute code/binary /naming & path compatibility? Is this for ever. ConfirmedDDD?
On the Mirrors, there are several directories ... and here is a readme:
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/Readme.txt
- Somewhere else it says addons will be there....again sure that these
will be seperate in extras but will keep the RHEL conventions? ConfirmedDDD?
The directory addons is for things that are required to be added to get CentOS to build .... or for things that build when rebuilding the SRPMS, but that are not in RHEL proper because they we left out. On RHEL-3, that would be several items. In RHEL-4, there were no major items
- Now about creating a local repository...I create a local repository
of all software I use and other computers installed in our company can use. At this time we are charged by the MB, so can't be public. So what repository do I rsync with? East US woulb be best for me...but I don't think I should hog on layer 1 repositories...so please do guide.
If you take a look here: http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=13
There are 6 US mirrors with RSYNC ... any of them should be OK.
On 5/29/05, Johnny Hughes mailing-lists@hughesjr.com wrote:
- Site seems to say...Basic Centos will remain same as RHEL...is that
absolute code/binary /naming & path compatibility? Is this for ever. ConfirmedDDD?
On the Mirrors, there are several directories ... and here is a readme:
This link does not tell about future of CentOS. I ask again...Will CentOS always retain 100% compatibility with RHEL, aside from contribs & addons which will remain seperate from the main distro and will be installed on user selection only.
Sanjay.
That is the primary goal of the distribution, to remain on par with RHEL as much as legally possible. This has been discussed previously on the list, so I can assure you the developers are keen to keep this distro in line with RHEL. That is its purpose of this OS as an "enterprise" OS.
On 5/29/05, Sanjay Arora sanjay.k.arora@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/29/05, Johnny Hughes mailing-lists@hughesjr.com wrote:
- Site seems to say...Basic Centos will remain same as RHEL...is that
absolute code/binary /naming & path compatibility? Is this for ever. ConfirmedDDD?
On the Mirrors, there are several directories ... and here is a readme:
This link does not tell about future of CentOS. I ask again...Will CentOS always retain 100% compatibility with RHEL, aside from contribs & addons which will remain seperate from the main distro and will be installed on user selection only.
Sanjay. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Sunday 29 May 2005 03:42, Sanjay Arora wrote:
This link does not tell about future of CentOS. I ask again...Will CentOS always retain 100% compatibility with RHEL, aside from contribs & addons which will remain seperate from the main distro and will be installed on user selection only.
How can you ask that when you're not paying anything for it? This assurance has some value, and that's what Red Hat is selling.
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 07:20 -0400, Simon Perreault wrote:
On Sunday 29 May 2005 03:42, Sanjay Arora wrote:
This link does not tell about future of CentOS. I ask again...Will CentOS always retain 100% compatibility with RHEL, aside from contribs & addons which will remain seperate from the main distro and will be installed on user selection only.
How can you ask that when you're not paying anything for it? This assurance has some value, and that's what Red Hat is selling.
I can tell you that the base CentOS will always be RHEL SOURCES (plus yum for doing updates). That is for for any CentOS version (present or in the future).
As long as the upstream providers release source to the public, CentOS will track it. We will not upgrade the Base CentOS (except through the optional CentOS Plus repo for some items).
So, If you install CentOS and not Extras or CentOS Plus, you have only the versions from currently released upstream source and our mechanism for updates (yum/createrepo).
On Monday 30 May 2005 07:34, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I can tell you that the base CentOS will always be RHEL SOURCES (plus yum for doing updates). That is for for any CentOS version (present or in the future).
Sure, of course, you and others are full of good intentions. But unless I pay you to sign a contract with me so that I can hold you accountable, I have no way to sue you if you (or your evil successors :) ) decide to do otherwise.
That's not a problem with me, but it seemed like it could be for the OP.
Simon Perreault wrote:
On Monday 30 May 2005 07:34, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I can tell you that the base CentOS will always be RHEL SOURCES (plus yum for doing updates). That is for for any CentOS version (present or in the future).
Sure, of course, you and others are full of good intentions. But unless I pay you to sign a contract with me so that I can hold you accountable, I have no way to sue you if you (or your evil successors :) ) decide to do otherwise.
That's not a problem with me, but it seemed like it could be for the OP. _______________________________________________
As others have mentioned, if you want the ability to sue someone for not supporting you, there's always RedHat. They'll be happy to take your support money in exchange for being "accountable." If you're comfortable with supporting yourself or relying on community support or if you just can't afford paid support, you can get exactly the same product in the form of CentOS.
Cheers,
C
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 07:32, Simon Perreault wrote:
On Monday 30 May 2005 07:34, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I can tell you that the base CentOS will always be RHEL SOURCES (plus yum for doing updates). That is for for any CentOS version (present or in the future).
Sure, of course, you and others are full of good intentions. But unless I pay you to sign a contract with me so that I can hold you accountable, I have no way to sue you if you (or your evil successors :) ) decide to do otherwise.
Realistically, one of the big reasons that support is dropped for anything it that the company providing it has gone out of business and where money is involved they will be bankrupt and your lawsuit will be futile. Sometimes it is just best to have a plan to switch to an alternative if your first choice becomes unavailable.
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 12:30 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
Realistically, one of the big reasons that support is dropped for anything it that the company providing it has gone out of business and where money is involved they will be bankrupt and your lawsuit will be futile. Sometimes it is just best to have a plan to switch to an alternative if your first choice becomes unavailable.
Yes. Exit plans play a major roll in mitigating the risk of rolling out a solution. Never, ever assume a vendor will continue a product.
Especially products that are not GPL or GPL compatible. Vendors virtually never offer a way out of any lock-in. Not my words but Gartner's.
On 5/30/05, Simon Perreault nomis80@lqt.ca wrote:
How can you ask that when you're not paying anything for it? This assurance has some value, and that's what Red Hat is selling.
Why can't I? Open Source is all about choices. I was using RedHat...would have gone to Fedora but they were too fast ..as far as release issues were concerned...So, I had a choice to make...go debian, slackware.
And then there was the option of having RedHat clones...of having RedHat minus support cost. I made my choice. All I had to do was to find a vibrant RHES clone community and join.
The direction of the base distro was a major issue. I did not want any major problems with production servers...so the Centos policy of RHES only base distro is good as far as I am concerned. If I opt for extras...I know I have got to do extra testing...or bear the blame! My personal box is always Fedora, updated weekly and I enjoy tweaking things when they breakdown but that can't do for production servers.
As another poster suggested, RedHat can be sued...I have neither intentions, nor time nor money to persue that with RedHat or anyone else.
With best regards. Sanjay.
-
Beau Henderson -
Bryan J. Smith -
Chris Mauritz -
Johnny Hughes -
Les Mikesell -
Sanjay Arora -
Simon Perreault