[CentOS-devel] Zero day updates upstream

Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
Thu Mar 15 23:47:13 UTC 2007

C. Halstead wrote:
> ----- "James Olin Oden" <james.oden at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 3/15/07, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote:
>>> So, what does everyone thing ? Should we release the tree with the
>>> updates rolled in ? or should we release the tree exactly as
>> upstream
>>> did, and also provide the updates to go alongside - but in the
>> updates
>>> repo ?
>> As a consumer of CentOS release's my point of view is that having it
>> all rolled in as much as possible would be better.   OTOH, I can see
>> from your point of view that mimicking their tree religously would
>> have some benefits too.
>> Cheers...james
> If the updates are rolled into the initial C5 release then we've lost all ability to ever do a base install that directly mimics the upstream release.  For most folks that doesn't matter, but for some of us having that ability is pretty important.  In a few weeks there'll be more updates anyway.

Maybe a copy of the outdated version could be archived somewhere for the 
  unlikely event of someone ever wanting its unfixed bugs again - and 
the rest of us could have the spiffy new version as a default...

As for working with driver disks - the RHEL kernels are supposed to have 
stable binary driver interfaces for the life of the distribution.  And 
if an update kernel doesn't work with a needed vendor driver, there 
wasn't much point in getting past the install anyway.

   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com

More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list