[CentOS] Re: Site about qmail (with CentOS as SO)
ssilva at sgvwater.com
Wed Oct 24 20:59:53 UTC 2007
on 10/24/2007 12:34 PM Johnny Hughes spake the following:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Scott Silva wrote:
>>>> No. But we had that stuff rather regularly with samba - their first line
>>>> of support seems to be : "Upgrade your version to the most current one,
>>>> then ask again."
>>>> That's what I meant.
>>> That is very common with applications. They don't back patch old
>>> versions, and the problem you ask about might be already fixed. Just
>>> look at the dovecot list. People still pop in and ask why 0.99 has
>>> this problem, because that is what their distro came with, but they
>>> are currently at 1.0.5, and have 1.1 in beta. Who has the time to
>>> backport fixes to old versions if you don't get paid for it?
>> And what's the point even if you do get paid? The problem is really in
>> distributions that by policy won't do a version level app upgrade even
>> in instances where it would clearly be better than patching the beta
>> version they chose to include.
> Well ... Even IF the dovecot people backported patches to 0.99 ... RHEL
> would probably not bring those patches in anyway, unless it fixed a
> problem that they have in the RH bugzilla. That is the whole purpose of
> freezing on the enterprise distribution.
> They fix security updates and bugs and you run it like it was released
> ... IT IS THE WHOLE FREAKING POINT.
> IF that isn't the distribution type you want ... CentOS is not the
> distribution for you :D
> (You being users in general and not anyone in particular)
And if you really need a particular package newer, you just have to bite the
bullet and either manage it yourself, or use a third party trusted repo that
has what you want. Even Centos made the redhat application stack available "if
you want it".
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!
More information about the CentOS