[CentOS] Re: core 2 duo motherboards and centos 4

Mon Jan 22 11:40:49 UTC 2007
Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com>

On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 07:20 +0900, John Summerfield wrote:

> I'm not sure it's entirely dead, though it's closer than I suggested. 
> Here's the notice from its website:
> 
> "The current model for supporting maintenance distributions is being 
> re-examined. In the meantime, we are unable to extend support to older 
> Fedora Core releases as we had planned. As of now, Fedora Core 4 and 
> earlier distributions are no longer being maintained."
> > 
> > You are correct though that Fedora is not shutting down. I mention this 
> > because
> > there seem to be people on this list that do not understand the 
> > difference. :-(
> 
> It's always the case that what seems clear to some is unclear to me.
> 

https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legacy-list/2006-December/msg00049.html

(that thread ... also carrying over into January is quite clear.  The
FedoraLegacy project is shutting down (as in, they are doing no more
updates for any FC/RH distro past, present, or future).  They are not
even sure if they will maintain the currently built content anywhere.

https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legacy-list/2007-January/thread.html

> btw, if you're particularly keen to stat at about the RHL 7.3 level then 
> CentOS 2.1 is close, CentOS 3 is close to FC1 (I think) and CentOS 4 is 
> a good match for FC3.
> 
> Note, "good match" is less than "perfect match." Making it work may 
> require some skill:-)

Those are the correct FC versions as a basis for the CentOS releases,
yes.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20070122/2e30efe2/attachment-0005.sig>