On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Lance Davis wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Morten Kjeldgaard wrote:
>
> > I am a bit puzzled at the versioning scheme of the RedHat clone family.
> >
> > RedHat seems to use integer 4, Tao and Centos does the same. If you do
> >
> > rpm -q --qf '%{version}\n' -f /etc/redhat-release
> >
> > you get '4'.
> >
> > However, Scientific Linux uses 4.0, and that seems to me to be a more
> > logical choise, since presumable there are going to be versions 4.1,
> > 4.2, etc.
> >
> > Is there any good reason for the version of package centos-release NOT
> > to be 4.0? It has a significance in automated scripts trying to work out
> > which distribution and version you are running, and it seems silly to
> > treat the different RHEL4 clones differently.
>
> CentOS uses '4' purely and simply to be compatible with Dag's (and other)
> repos, whixch ae geared towards rhel using 4.
>
> We used to use 4.x but had compaints that the configuration of yum was not
> compatible with that suggested by Dag for rhel.
I hope it was not changed only for me though. (Although I would be
honoured for having that much impact)
I think it belongs to the 'as compatible to RHEL as possible' clause.
Maybe Scientific Linux is not meant to be as compatible as possible, but
more a product based on RHEL, maybe the numbers might even deviate (like
4.1.1) ?
PS With RHEL3, TaoLinux was using 1. So you're lucky that at least
everybody except Scientific Linux is using 4 now :)
Kind regards,
-- dag wieers, dag at wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]