I'm sorry (I know don't feed the trolls), but recently
there have been quite a few remarks resembling this.
Also, I'm beginning to believe the remark made earlier
by ???, which roughly stated "Each time a new release
is due, the flame wars erupt".
Just what part of "CentOS is a Mirror or Redhat OS" do
you miss?
Now please, return to the rpm building and raid/lvm
discussions, as I find them very interesting and
educational.
michael...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Sean
> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 2:46 PM
> To: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: two cents or not two cents
>
>
> Hello Producers
>
> "Longevity of Support" is an attractive drawcard for CentOS if it means
> the exact opposite of Fedora's "short support cycle" that does not
> provide updating of infrastructural libraries for very long, libraries
> which newer versions of applications (like Firefox, Thunderbird, Opera
> etc) depend on and which wont install unless the libraries are also
> newer versions? But is that what it means -- ie that those
> infrastructural libraries (libpango, libcairo etc) are continuously
> updateable to fairly recent versions?
>
> If so, the problem is in reconciling that meaning with the reputation of
> CentOS to only support older versions of applications (eg Firefox-1.5,
> Thunderbird-1.0 etc). It does reconcile, of course, if the implications
> are merely that the CentOS user must compile and install the later
> versions of such applications from source, rather than having the luxury
> of pre-packaged binaries. It doesn't reconcile if there is some other
> critical reason why newer such applications just wont install. But which?
>
> I ask here because the profusion of vague mission statements and
> 'target-enduser-profile' claims that litter the internet re '*nix
> distros' seldom actually address those real issues. And hopefully
> someone can enlighten. My complex production & developement desktop
> takes months to fully port to a new OS (or OS-version), so OS updates to
> get library updates (ala Fedora philosophy) becomes increasingly untenable.
>
> Then there is a further question, I'm afraid. Since CentOS also does
> specifically target the profile of a so-called 'enterprise/server-user'
> what does that actually entail. Does it mean concrete security
> strictures which bolt down non-'root' users or does it merely mean the
> availability of SELinux (but which can be turned OFF)? For instance,
> (with SELinux OFF), can a user still:
> (a) su root via Kterm anytime?
> (b) Access services-admin anytime via Menu+Pam to control printers,
> modems, daemons etc?
> (c) compile
> (d) have 6 to 8 desktops running
> (e) call up 'konquerorsu.desktop' (root-konqueror with embedded root-Kterm)
> (f) have normal cron scheduling
> .......................................................... maybe more,
> but that's a start.
>
> Thanks for listening.
>
> Sean
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
