> > > If this sort of stance seems risible to you, you probably shouldn’t > > be using CentOS. This is what distinguishes a “stable” type of OS > > from a “bleeding edge” one. > > When a version of a software has been released 20 years ago, > that doesn´t mean it´s more stable than a version of that > software which is being released today. Not "software", Warren said "OS" - it's the whole ecosystem that is more stable if the versions of the software that's within it are kept consistent. > > Of course, you can consider "never change the version of the > software" as something making for a stable OS. But what about > the bug fixes? Critical bug fixes are back ported, if appropriate, into the version of the software packaged with the OS - that is the point of the commitment by RH to support the OS. > > The software has been written with perl 5.20.1, which is already > rather old. As far as I can see it hadn't been released when RHEL7 was released, so there's no chance of it being the default version. As others have said, if you need bang up-to-date versions of software, then RHEL/CentOS is not for you. P.