On Wed, Oct 29, 2014, at 09:22, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>
> On Wed, October 29, 2014 9:06 am, Steve Clark wrote:
> > On 10/29/2014 10:02 AM, Beartooth wrote:
> >> I'm running CentOS 6 (6.5 iirc) on my wife's machine, which I've
> >> been updating pretty much every day. Today yum got 425 packages!
> >>
> >> Somewhere a dam must have broken. Sometimes some of us don't
> >> appreciate how much work the developers do.
> >>
> >> Strength to their arms, and many heartfelt thanks!
> > +100
> >
>
> Me too. I was [mistakenly, apparently] always considering 5.[n+1],
> 6.[m+1]
> just re-spins, thus providing latest packages with _backported_ security
> patches/bugfixes, aimed at providing installation media that is not
> entail
> millions of updates. "Releases" with newer versions, drivers included in
> kernel shuffled, the new kernel (without any necessity in it) which
> causes
> hassle to reboot the box... This all effectively defeats the "Enterprise"
> portion of the name of the system, doesn't it?
>
I had a customer with a Violin SAN and they couldn't update their
RHEL/CentOS servers any higher than a certain point release not because
the driver broke, but because the rest of the provided glue broke. I
can't recall the fine details, but I'm pretty sure it was a major change
to udev in the middle of a major release.
I don't understand the direction that has been taken. Anything that runs
on 6.0 should run flawlessly on 6.6. Period.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
