On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > [1]: I say that with a pinch of salt though - EL6 is a tad overdue. A > lot of new projects and services need a codebase newer than whats on > offer in C5. I agree with you 100%+. _______________________________________________ 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: Larry Vaden <vaden@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 12:18:38 -0600
- Delivered-to: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <4D499E13.4050802@xxxxxxxxx>
- References:
- Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
- From: Larry Vaden
- Re: Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
- From: Karanbir Singh
- Re: Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
- From: Larry Vaden
- Re: Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
- From: Karanbir Singh
- Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
- Prev by Date: Re: 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: Re: 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):
 |