>From: John Newbigin <jn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: CentOS Users <centos@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [Centos] Issues/thoughts re CentOS-4
>Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:22:21 +1100
>
>* Mission: To stay as close to RedHat as possible
>Issues: some things need to be modified to support this. For example the
>cpu/memory restrictions will be removed(like in CentOS-3).
Could you please share more information about this? What cpu/memory
restrictions are in Centos 3 which are not present in RHEL3 ? This is what I
am trying to discover which RHEL version like AS, ES or WS is Centos based
on. I was under impression after reading Centros website documents that
Centos is designed to be an almost 100% RHEL clone minus the copyrighted
Redhat logos.
>If we start making changes, where do we draw the line? In CentOS-2 I have
>fixed some small 1 line bugs (mostly packaging issues) but this might be a
>contentious issue. What about a CentOS+ repo. for enhanced versions?
Yes please! Please keep Centos changes to RHEL SRPMS separate from RHEL
clone packages.
>* Issue: should the distro be self hosting? I think as long as the
>requirements are available from the addon/extras repos. then I don't think
>this is needed out of the box. Obviously the build environment needs to be
>well documented and reproducible.
Do you get best RHEL clone packages from building on RHEL AS computer
itself? If so then I believe that is what should be used to build Centos
RPMS. Opinions?
>* Mission: Remove RedHat trademarks.
>Issues: should we replace all rh logos/icons or just the ones required by
>RedHat? I think if the file/words can be replaced then yes, but package
>names etc. should be left alone.
A nice mission would be to remain 100% RHEL compatible with just no Redhat
copyright logos + references.
>* Issue: gpg key.
>This should be installed by default so the user does not have to find &
>import it. At a minimum it should be in /usr/share/doc/centos-release and
>work like a RedHat box.
This will be convenient!
>* Issue: release QA
>Before public release, a QA procedure should make sure that there are no
>obvious problems (like the comps issue of 3.3).
Ah also an good idea. Less bugs = more fun =)
>* Idea: automatic patch building.
>It should be possible to build most patches without intervention. I don't
>know what the current systems in place are but if there were autobuilt
>unsigned patches available it would allow
>- testing of patches before they are 'officially' released
>- checking the progress if a patch
What patches are added to RHEL SRPMS besides logo removals?
This is the main reason why I am browsing Centos documents. I would like to
use RHEL clone on which to install RHEL compatible certified software and
hardware. If HP server is certified for RHEL AS then can I use with CEntos
without headaches? Same with software also like from Veritas or Oracle. I am
just giving examples ........ I dont use Oracle but just in case someone
else does.
Many thanks to all. Max.
_________________________________________________________________
Take charge with a pop-up guard built on patented Microsoft® SmartScreen
Technology
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the
first two months FREE*.
