On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 22:56:24 +0200 Ljubomir Ljubojevic <office at plnet.rs> wrote: > Rob Kampen wrote: > > Tom Bishop wrote: > >> This is excellent information Akemi, provides opportunities for > >> folks to dig in and specific information that is needed and where > >> to go to learn more...Thanks! :) > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Akemi Yagi <amyagi at gmail.com > >> <mailto:amyagi at gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> Changing the subject line for good ... > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu > >> <mailto:lowen at pari.edu>> wrote: > >> > On Thursday, April 07, 2011 11:23:51 AM Brunner, Brian T. > >> > wrote: > >> >> 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. > >> > > >> > This one doesn't impact the CentOS core rebuild. It > >> > would/could > >> impact CentOSPlus. > >> > >> Yes, it _could_ affect the centosplus kernel. This point was > >> addressed > >> early on when RHEL-6 was released back in Nov 2010. See: > >> > >> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4586 > >> > >> Point 2 (note 12051) is the one that is relevant. I welcome any > >> feedback / suggestions for the proposed method I outlined > >> there. While you are there, look also at the issues described for > >> Point 3 (note 12052). Anyone can help in there as well. :) > >> > >> So far, "luckily" centosplus kernels are "ahead of" the distro > >> kernel in that they have been built and are available for testing > >> (see note 12502). > >> > > This post has led me to lots of information about the CentOS build > > process and makes me offer the following comment:-/ > > > > PLEASE ALL - have a look around the wiki and bugs - there is heaps > > of information about the status of the various build processes and > > even how to do it yourself - at least from a getting started level > > - I'm sure once one gets into it there would be some questions, but > > just like here > > - if one shows what has been tried, and the specific problem > > encountered, and what attempts have been made to resolve the > > problem - then help would be available to assist you in the forward > > direction. > > > > Rather than making a nuisance and noise on the lists and expecting > > digested sound bites to appease your thirst for information from > > the folk that do the work - go have a look. > > > > It is readily apparent that the build process is very reliant upon > > having "all one's ducks in a row" and one minor version change in a > > dependent source file means the output will not be the binary match > > with the upstream provider that CentOS delivers. Thus the process > > gives new meaning to the word "iterative". > > > > My thanks to all those doing the painstaking work of making it work > > right the first time - I for one, am not detail oriented enough to > > do this kind of work, and so I suspect are many of those on this > > list. Please do not get discouraged by those who lash out on the > > various forum but accept this heart felt THANK YOU from a long time > > user that appreciates all that you do. > > > > I see comments about not being able to rely upon CentOS for > > business use > > - I beg to differ, I use CentOS for my business and am very > > satisfied with the quality of the product. > > There are certainly some business uses where the time-frame of the > > CentOS build process is a problem - if that is the case then there > > are alternatives - they do cost money. > > Pay your money and make your choice - no money.......accept what is > > CentOS and see if there is somewhere you can contribute to a very > > informative and helpful infrastructure - preferably in a polite and > > positive manner. > > Thanks for reading. > > +1000 > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos +1001