Well,
I'm a recent convert from WBEL. My biggest concern with CentOS is that the community here seems to want to be more than a recompile of RHEL.
But WBEL is floundering, what with Katrina and Rita, and there really being only 1 developer behind it, etc.
I offer an automated shell script to switch from WBEL4 to CentOS4 (easy, it's hosted on my home DSL line!) It assumes that you've been using yum to perform updates...
http://chico.benjamindsmith.com/wbel2centos4.sh
How many otther ex-WBEL users are there here?
-Ben
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 11:10:25PM -0700, Benjamin Smith wrote:
My biggest concern with CentOS is that the community here seems to want to be more than a recompile of RHEL.
Nonsense. That is what we have Dag Wieers (and others) for, so we don't lack anything we need on CentOS :)
[]s
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa rodrigob@suespammers.org "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
Benjamin Smith wrote:
I'm a recent convert from WBEL. My biggest concern with CentOS is that the community here seems to want to be more than a recompile of RHEL.
The base distro is nothing more than a recompile - there is no reason why you should have any reasons to doubt that [1]. You will actually find that we stick with Redhat's product line a lot close than Whitebox does ( for EL4 atleast ).
CentOS, as a project, does indeed provide more options via extra repositories - but if you dont want them, there is no reason for you to enable and use them.
But WBEL is floundering, what with Katrina and Rita, and there really being only 1 developer behind it, etc.
That is because he has refused any outside help, Whitebox is built for his own use and he will not accept anyone else's work in there. If that means there are no updates for 5 - 6 months at a go, so be it.
- K
[1] if you do feel otherwise, feel free to point out specifics and we can address the issues.
On 10/12/05, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
Benjamin Smith wrote:
I'm a recent convert from WBEL. My biggest concern with CentOS is that the community here seems to want to be more than a recompile of RHEL.
The base distro is nothing more than a recompile - there is no reason why you should have any reasons to doubt that [1].
Not to get into it again, but when you say "nothing more than a recompile" that's just begging for me to point it out:
CentOS does modify and add a variety of packages. These are either because
1. RH uses a proprietary update system so CentOS needed an updater and yum works fine. 2. SRPMS didn't build properly (I believe libglade or something like that) 3. CentOS provides new bookmarks for firefox and updates mozilla/firefox to include the OpenCert. 4. Probably some other small things that are all very justifiable, but are more than "nothing."
Greg
On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 19:12 -0600, Greg Knaddison wrote:
On 10/12/05, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
Benjamin Smith wrote:
I'm a recent convert from WBEL. My biggest concern with CentOS is that the community here seems to want to be more than a recompile of RHEL.
The base distro is nothing more than a recompile - there is no reason why you should have any reasons to doubt that [1].
Not to get into it again, but when you say "nothing more than a recompile" that's just begging for me to point it out:
CentOS does modify and add a variety of packages. These are either because
- RH uses a proprietary update system so CentOS needed an updater and
yum works fine. 2. SRPMS didn't build properly (I believe libglade or something like that) 3. CentOS provides new bookmarks for firefox and updates mozilla/firefox to include the OpenCert. 4. Probably some other small things that are all very justifiable, but are more than "nothing."
---- yeah - attempts to define what it is they're doing sort of belittles it because there is much more to it than first glance.
They are compiling for more architectures including an i586 set in the i386 and as the updates from this weekend demonstrated, there are a lot of users and mirrors to populate which takes iron and pipe.
Craig
Greg Knaddison wrote:
On 10/12/05, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
Benjamin Smith wrote:
I'm a recent convert from WBEL. My biggest concern with CentOS is that the community here seems to want to be more than a recompile of RHEL.
The base distro is nothing more than a recompile - there is no reason why you should have any reasons to doubt that [1].
Not to get into it again, but when you say "nothing more than a recompile" that's just begging for me to point it out:
CentOS does modify and add a variety of packages. These are either because
Agreed, Details for CentOS4 at http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/os/i386/RELEASE-NOTES-en.html
- K
On 10/17/05, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
Agreed, Details for CentOS4 at http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/os/i386/RELEASE-NOTES-en.html
Thanks kindly to Karanbir and to everyone else that provided this list.
Greg
Benjamin Smith wrote:
Well,
I'm a recent convert from WBEL. My biggest concern with CentOS is that the community here seems to want to be more than a recompile of RHEL.
But WBEL is floundering, what with Katrina and Rita, and there really being only 1 developer behind it, etc.
I offer an automated shell script to switch from WBEL4 to CentOS4 (easy, it's hosted on my home DSL line!) It assumes that you've been using yum to perform updates...
http://chico.benjamindsmith.com/wbel2centos4.sh
How many otther ex-WBEL users are there here?
-Ben
Ben,
Welcome!
I'm a convert. Early on, Whitebox was IMHO ahead of CentOS. Seems the distribution was out faster IIRC. Whitebox possibly did more for the EL distros than any other clone. My hat's off to John Morris for providing the distro to the world.
Also, being conservative with my servers, early on I had more trust in the WBEL release. There were obviously no 'loose cannons'. Meanwhile CentOS was forming and chose a great path with great people.
After time, I became unhappy with the update timeframe and made the switch to CentOS. CentOS had obviously matured into what it is today. I find that releases are plenty timely to suit me. I have in the past done updates a bit 'too quickly' from Redhat and been stung a time or two. This slight delay is not a drawback in my opinion.
CentOS also seems to be more particular with regards to mirrors, excepting only fast connections whereas with Whitebox I would sometimes hit a mirror with ISDN-like speeds. I'm not slamming Whitebox at all. I am very happy with CentOS and how the group works. I appreciate 'all' the clone distros and hope the all survive and thrive. Things do change and it is always nice to have options.
Thanks to all involved in doing such fine work and for the donation of your time and resources. I'll be making another donation in the near future.
Best Regards, John Hinton
-
Benjamin Smith -
Craig White -
Greg Knaddison -
John Hinton -
Karanbir Singh -
Rodrigo Barbosa