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 Maybe a copy of the outdated version could be archived somewhere for the unlikely event of someone ever wanting its unfixed bugs again - and the rest of us could have the spiffy new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