On 11/26/2011 11:43 AM, g wrote: > On 11/26/2011 12:32 AM, Ed Greshko wrote: > <> > >> Scientific Linux is simply a variant Red Hat Enterprise Linux just as >> CentOS is. It just packages, and installs by default, applications for >> the "scientific" community. > from this statement, i presume that you have not installed and used > Scientific Linux for any length of time. tho i may be wrong. > > i can say from my own experience of installing and using "SL", your > statement is not entirely true. > > on this system/box, i have SL and Fedora installed because i want a > stable 'long life' os and a 'play with' os. > > SL is very stable and is maintained by a group of 'tech heads' that > know what they are doing. if they did not, they would not be working > in the environment of Fermilab Accelerator Research Center, aka, > Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. > > if it is safe for such an environment, it is safe for my use. > > besides, it is RHEL. "if it's Red Hat, it has to be good". 8-D > What part isn't true? Nowhere in what I've written did I compare SL with Fedora. Nowhere did I make any claims of stable v.s. unstable. So, I'm puzzled as to why you would do so. SL is RHEL recompiled from source with the RH copyrighted materials removed....just like CentOS. Right? -- Even if you do learn to speak correct English, whom are you going to speak it to? -- Clarence Darrow -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
