Ah, a reminder that it is always dangerous to unveil the vague? Sorry ... I should have pre-read 6000 pages from Redhat ... (but maybe I did!). Sean Michael R. Dilworth wrote: > I'm sorry (I know don't feed the trolls), but recently > there have been quite a few remarks resembling this. > Also, I'm beginning to believe the remark made earlier > by ???, which roughly stated "Each time a new release > is due, the flame wars erupt". > > Just what part of "CentOS is a Mirror or Redhat OS" do > you miss? > > Now please, return to the rpm building and raid/lvm > discussions, as I find them very interesting and > educational. > > michael... > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org]On >> Behalf Of Sean >> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 2:46 PM >> To: centos at centos.org >> Subject: [CentOS] two cents or not two cents >> >> >> Hello Producers >> >> "Longevity of Support" is an attractive drawcard for CentOS if it means >> the exact opposite of Fedora's "short support cycle" that does not >> provide updating of infrastructural libraries for very long, libraries >> which newer versions of applications (like Firefox, Thunderbird, Opera >> etc) depend on and which wont install unless the libraries are also >> newer versions? But is that what it means -- ie that those >> infrastructural libraries (libpango, libcairo etc) are continuously >> updateable to fairly recent versions? >> >> If so, the problem is in reconciling that meaning with the reputation of >> CentOS to only support older versions of applications (eg Firefox-1.5, >> Thunderbird-1.0 etc). It does reconcile, of course, if the implications >> are merely that the CentOS user must compile and install the later >> versions of such applications from source, rather than having the luxury >> of pre-packaged binaries. It doesn't reconcile if there is some other >> critical reason why newer such applications just wont install. But which? >> >> I ask here because the profusion of vague mission statements and >> 'target-enduser-profile' claims that litter the internet re '*nix >> distros' seldom actually address those real issues. And hopefully >> someone can enlighten. My complex production & developement desktop >> takes months to fully port to a new OS (or OS-version), so OS updates to >> get library updates (ala Fedora philosophy) becomes increasingly untenable. >> >> Then there is a further question, I'm afraid. Since CentOS also does >> specifically target the profile of a so-called 'enterprise/server-user' >> what does that actually entail. Does it mean concrete security >> strictures which bolt down non-'root' users or does it merely mean the >> availability of SELinux (but which can be turned OFF)? For instance, >> (with SELinux OFF), can a user still: >> (a) su root via Kterm anytime? >> (b) Access services-admin anytime via Menu+Pam to control printers, >> modems, daemons etc? >> (c) compile >> (d) have 6 to 8 desktops running >> (e) call up 'konquerorsu.desktop' (root-konqueror with embedded root-Kterm) >> (f) have normal cron scheduling >> .......................................................... maybe more, >> but that's a start. >> >> Thanks for listening. >> >> Sean >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CentOS mailing list >> CentOS at centos.org >> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> >> > >