On 07/04/11 21:38, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 4/7/2011 3:04 PM, Ned Slider wrote: >> >> CentOS AIMS to be 100% binary compatible and for the most part it is, >> but I'm tired of seeing this misnomer repeated over and over like some >> holy grail. Personally I'm with Russ on this one that whilst an >> admirable goal I think the importance of binary compatibility is >> sometimes overstated and often misunderstood. > > Plus, if there is anything that is broken about what you get by > rebuilding RHEL src rpms under RHEL, it should be made public and either > fixed or acknowleged as the intended outcome. > Huh? Red Hat never claimed RHEL to be self hosting wrt (re)building itself.