On 03/31/2015 01:28 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 03/31/2015 12:31 PM, Greg Bailey wrote: >> On 03/31/2015 09:53 AM, Ryan Qian wrote: >>> As a CentOs newbie, I'm not sure, will we still have CentOS 7.1 which >>> derive from RHEL 7.1? >>> or this is the new naming conversion for CentOS 7. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> -Ryan >> >> >> That was going to be my question as well. According to >> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2014-July/020393.html >> the convention (for the 7.0 release at least) says: >> >> "Numbering >> >> CentOS 7.0-1406 introduces a new numbering scheme that we want to >> further develop into the life of CentOS-7. The 0 component maps to the >> upstream realease, whose code this release is built from. The 1406 >> component indicates the monthstamp of the code included in the release >> ( in this case, June 2014 ). By using a monthstamp we are able to >> respin and reissue updated media for things like container and cloud >> images, that are regularly refreshed, while still retaining a >> connection to the base distro version." >> >> I would have assumed that this release would be "7.1.1503", and the URL >> on at least one mirror has: >> >> http://mirror.fdcservers.net/centos/7.1.1503/ >> >> Guess if that's the new convention, I'll need to keep my ISO files >> sorted out somehow, as this progression isn't intuitive: >> >> CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-DVD.iso >> CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso > > Please take a look at the "Archived Versions", and the Release Announcement: > > They both tell you that 7 (1503) is derived from Red Hat Enterprise > Linux 7.1 Sources. So, yes, this release, that you quoted in the > Subject, is indeed exactly what you said. > > And yes, this is how we are now numbering CentOS releases for 7 and > greater. OOPS: Archived Versions, on this Page: http://wiki.centos.org/Download
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
