Hi,
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Mathieu Baudier <mbaudier@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> If absolute 100% binary compatibility is not required, but admin-level compatibility and source-level compatibility with upstream EL is, Scientific Linux is covering that niche, and has their 6.1 out.
>
> In which concrete use cases is 100% binary compatibility important?
I am no expert in compiling RPMs, but just recently I experienced the
following:
After installing a previous version of 3rd party SOGo RPM and
reporting to the developers that the service wouldn't start after
installation, I was informed that the RPM had been compiled on
Scientific Linux 6.1 and because of binary incompatibility the RPM did
not work under RHEL/CentOS. They recompiled on CentOS and the updated
RPM installed/worked fine on my system.
So if CentOS wouldn't be 100% compatible with RHEL, I guess we would
start seeing more cases where programs compiled on RHEL might not run
on CentOS. If you use just the base RPMs provided by the distro, this
is no problem. But if you rely on some commercial / 3rd party RPMs,
you might start facing problems.
At least this is how I understood it, please correct me if I've got it wrong :)
Best,
Peter
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
