On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 11:07 -0700, MHR wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 7:44 AM, Doug Tucker <tuckerd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I intend to do that. Kernel's removed from automatic updates.
> >
> There you go.
>
> > We'll agree to disagree about the importance of not breaking an
> > officially supported kernel filesystem on an automated upgrade because
> > only a "few" of us are affected. Keep in mind this is not an
> > unsupported XFS that someone hijacked my thread with. I say there is
> > little in a new kernel that the "rest" of the users cannot wait 2-3
> > lousy days for. Wanna stretch it to a week to meet your statement of
> > "earliest", I can live with that and my statement still stands. And, I
> > do realize this is not centos's fight, I guess my complaint is with
> > RedHat in this case, they should be more responsible than that. If M$
> > took that policy and released official upgrades they knew would break
> > even a small percentage of their users, especially something as critical
> > as the very filesystem that your entire user data resides on, we (the
> > linux community) would be throwing them under the rug for it.
> >
>
> 1) You're top posting - please stop it. In this email list, we bottom
> post as a matter of policy and courtesy. It's not that hard....
I'm sorry, that last sentence was unnecessary and just rude. I don't
tell you how to set your email client and what your preference is toward
how you like to read your email. I find it completely annoying to have
to scroll to the bottom of a message to read a reply. I will comply
with the group as a whole that I chose to join, I was unaware that
bottom posting was preference. But I do not appreciate the tone, you
could have easily asked nicely or referred me to the preference policy
for me to follow.
> 2) This isn't really an issue of "agreeing to disagree." XFS is *not*
> a Red Hat product at all. They (RH) do not support it at all. The
> CentOS project provides XFS as an *extra* that is NOT part of the
> mainline CentOS release stream. It is only supported by the CentOS
> group in the centosplus repository, which is a courtesy provided for
> free by the CentOS group.
This is a matter of agreeing to disagree on the release of a kernel and
a supported file system. If you had read my thread and subsequent
paragraph you're taking issue with properly, you would have gotten that.
My whole issue is around GFS, which is officially supported (someone
else hijacked this thread with XFS which got more attention), and in my
statement I said: "Keep in mind this is not an unsupported XFS that
someone hijacked my thread with." So I'm agreeing that XFS should never
be brought up in the same fashion as GFS, as it is not a supported file
system. GFS is, and it is my opinion RH should release the 2 together.
>
> IOW, CentOS does not have to support XFS at all. That they do is a courtesy.
>
> Now, if you like the centosplus "product" and use it, remember to
> follow the guidelines for it - little things like not doing automatic
> updates because you already *know* that centosplus does not come out
> immediately when RH releases a change that CentOS picks up and
> releases as well.
I already agreed and removed kernel from the update, no need to lecture.
Again, if you will take the time to read instead of knee-jerking a
reaction in some automatic defense of your feelings, you will note that
I took the aim at RedHat for the issue, and said it was not CentOS's
problem. Read boy, read.
> All of this is clearly discussed here from time to time, so the
> expectations have been set accordingly. Please try to remember this
> and manage your installations accordingly, too.
>
> And that's *my* soapbox, from which I will now step down and shut up.
> Temporarily.
And unfortunately, all based on improper understanding of what was
written, which makes it inappropriate in a public forum. Me thinks you
had seen enough of the other guy whining about his unsupported platform,
saw the word XFS in my paragraph, and basically quit reading and decided
to send your XFS rant at me. I hope from a therapeutic standpoint, it
helped you in some fashion.
:D
> :-}
>
> mhr
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
