[CentOS] what people really mean when they say they're running "5.3"?
John R Pierce
pierce at hogranch.comSun Aug 8 20:29:05 UTC 2010
- Previous message: [CentOS] what people really mean when they say they're running "5.3"?
- Next message: [CentOS] what people really mean when they say they're running"5.3"?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 08/08/10 1:12 PM, James Hogarth wrote: > > I do find this behaviour very odd... if you are not intending to get > support from redhat why not just install CentOS in the beginning so > you can still get updates? Ah well... > > fairly often, its due to some perceived vendor requirements on the part of operations people. Or, the server was purchased with a RHEL license, but it wasn't renewed. I have to work with operations people in overseas manufacturing plants, who are _extremely_ conservative about applying updates. if its not broken, they won't fix it. as most of these systems are single function (run a java based application suite used for factory floor message routing, or run an oracle/postgres/whatever database along with some java stuff that front ends for the database), most updates have nothing to do with the mission.
- Previous message: [CentOS] what people really mean when they say they're running "5.3"?
- Next message: [CentOS] what people really mean when they say they're running"5.3"?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS mailing list