[CentOS] why was LILO removed from centOS 4.2?

[Bryan J. Smith]

Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com> wrote:
> BUT ... the RHEL taroon list is also available and RH has
> people who monitor and answer questions on that list.
> You don't have to be a paying RH customer to join or post
> questions to that list ... and that is a mechanism to
feedback
> info directly to RH.

Yep, but some people on this list are oblivous to that.

[ Yes, it's going in the ELManagers FAQ -- which I'll finish
when I'm not working 80+ hours/week, as well as when
[American] football season is over ;-]

> I know that there are a couple RH people who are subscribed
> to this list too, but they probably won't answer those kind
> of questions here :)

People forget that Red Hat employees can't always say things
because what they say could be taken as coming from Red Hat,
and not themselves.  Anyone on the various Red Hat lists will
see this too -- with only a select few people, where X is
their paid focus, are in a position to give an "unofficial'
answer.

So, again, if you want those answers, you've gotta hit the
Red Hat lists to reach those relevant people who _can_ say
things because they _are_ the authority on them at Red Hat.

> We have taken some heat for that decision, but we will not
> change it.
> SO, if you want something in CentOS proper, it needs to be
> in the upstream providers product. 

It's the #1 reason why I can trust CentOS when I don't want
to pay for a SLA.  And I know there are a lot of other,
paying Red Hat customers here who have the same view (as well
some who aren't paying RH customers who probably feel the
same way).



-- 
Bryan J. Smith                | Sent from Yahoo Mail
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org     |  (please excuse any
http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ |   missing headers)