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 >