You surely want them, but I can't see why it's a bad concept-- "Distro X has published Y weekly MB of updates on average over the last year" is just a fact.
Distro X has had 650MB of updates over the course of the last 4 months. Distro Y has had 130MB of updates over the same period. Which one is more secure or stable? Distro Y's updates include a number of tiny but critical updates to things like pam modules, apache and the like because they seem to constantly have critical flaws letting unauthorized evil people into the system via remote exploit. The trending of these updates shows a systemic security problem in the distro's ability to patch properly. This distro also has a number of other flaws still outstanding waiting to be patched. Distro X has updated openoffice a couple times to add support for Open document format and a few other reasons. OpenOffice.org is just a HUGE package. The above hypothetical should illustrate why your method is flawed. It's not "bad" exactly, nor is it entirely wrong. It just doesn't figure everything into the equation. -- During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
