On 02/02/2011 05:22 PM, Larry Vaden wrote: > What is RH's be-all end-all justification for staying with an ancient > code base for such important programs as BIND et al? Did you ask them ? what did they say ? > Is there any support among the CentOS community for a REPO of current > vintage for such important functions as BIND et al? you mean like the bind97 available in c5-testing right now, that should be in 5.6 soon ? - KB _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: CentOS mailing list <centos@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
- From: Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:22:23 +0000
- Delivered-to: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <AANLkTimkk7dgaJ0PsPTZSqzx+x54dj-RnzXSR5eQRnZa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
- Next by Date: Re: Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
- Previous by thread: Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
- Next by thread: Re: Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
- Index(es):
 |