On Wed, Oct 29, 2014, at 09:22, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > > On Wed, October 29, 2014 9:06 am, Steve Clark wrote: > > On 10/29/2014 10:02 AM, Beartooth wrote: > >> I'm running CentOS 6 (6.5 iirc) on my wife's machine, which I've > >> been updating pretty much every day. Today yum got 425 packages! > >> > >> Somewhere a dam must have broken. Sometimes some of us don't > >> appreciate how much work the developers do. > >> > >> Strength to their arms, and many heartfelt thanks! > > +100 > > > > Me too. I was [mistakenly, apparently] always considering 5.[n+1], > 6.[m+1] > just re-spins, thus providing latest packages with _backported_ security > patches/bugfixes, aimed at providing installation media that is not > entail > millions of updates. "Releases" with newer versions, drivers included in > kernel shuffled, the new kernel (without any necessity in it) which > causes > hassle to reboot the box... This all effectively defeats the "Enterprise" > portion of the name of the system, doesn't it? > I had a customer with a Violin SAN and they couldn't update their RHEL/CentOS servers any higher than a certain point release not because the driver broke, but because the rest of the provided glue broke. I can't recall the fine details, but I'm pretty sure it was a major change to udev in the middle of a major release. I don't understand the direction that has been taken. Anything that runs on 6.0 should run flawlessly on 6.6. Period.