On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 08:48 -0700, MJang wrote: > On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 11:36 -0400, Brunner, Brian T. wrote: > > centos-bounces at centos.org wrote: > > > On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 11:23 -0400, Brunner, Brian T. wrote: > > >> centos-bounces at centos.org wrote: > > >>> On 7.4.2011 16:58, Les Mikesell wrote: > > >>> > > >>> This sounds as if RH is responsible for not yet released CentOS 6 ? > > >>> What did I miss ? What changes do you talking about ? > > >> > > >> AIUI: In previous releases, RH distributed source + patches. > > >> Starting > > >> 6.0 RH releases patched source. This makes backing out a patch, or > > >> backporting patches from future development in Fedora (e.g.) far > > >> more nightmarish than before. > > >> > > >> Also AIUI, it appears the (undisclosed) RH build environment changed > > >> significantly, such that generating bit-for-bit identical binaries (a > > >> CentOS objective) requires mind-reading RH folks by CentOS folks (aka > > >> reverse-engineering the undisclosed RH build environment). > > >> > > >> These two square wheels make the CentOS wagon a bit slower than > > >> before. > > > > > > I would appreciate an answer to one related question. > > > > > > Will CentOS release CentOS 6.0 as a production release? > > > > > > I see three possible answers: yes/no/TBD. > > > > Answer 4: > > This is not just an answer of > > "yes it's a production release" > > it's > > "production releases are all that CentOS ever does." > > Appreciate the clarification. I had thought that like SL, there would > have been a CentOS 6 beta. From my searches, it appears that I was > mistaken, there is no --public-- (or private?) CentOS 6 beta. If I'm reading https://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=25878&forum=53 correctly, there will be a CentOS 6 beta first, though http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/AuditStatus suggests about 50 packages still at issue in the audit process. So those audited packages must be cleared first before a CentOS 6 beta is released? Thanks, Mike