On Sat, 2008-04-05 at 14:54 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Alan Bartlett wrote:
> >
> > (2) We must not loose sight of what CentOS basically is. CentOS == RHEL less
> > RH. A stable, server orientated OS. On the fora, we often see evidence that
> > CentOS is believed to be similar to *other* distros (that are more suitable
> > for laptops & "home" use) and that it, CentOS, can be loaded onto typical
> > laptops or home PCs. Then the grumbling starts about the non-operation of a
> > bottom-of-the-range NIC or video controller or how multi-media doesn't work
> > straight out of the box. The complaints that really irritate me are those
> > that end with ". . . . whilst 'foo' (or 'bar' or 'xyzzy' or 'y2') runs o.k.
> > on my hardware. So why doesn't CentOS?"
>
> This is more a symptom of the kernel age than anything else, and with
> the backported drivers that sometimes end up in CentOS, this is subject
> to change as the minor version numbers get their install images rebuilt.
> And with the CentOS plus kernel, this doesn't necessarily track RHEL
> exactly either. Is there a place to find out whether a certain piece of
> hardware will work that stays up to date with the updates?
Ignore the ls >log command. it would take a lil more than that after
looking at the kernell source code. Slightly bit more complicated than
that.
>
--
~/john
OpenPGP Sig:BA91F079
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
