Robert Nichols wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Michael A. Peters wrote:
>>> Wow, I really must be out of the loop. New versions of RHEL every 4-6
>>> months?
>>>
>>> Damn. I left Fedora because their release schedule was too frequent ...
>> The Fedora releases change behavior wildly with each release. The point
>> of enterprise versions is that they maintain backwards compatibility
>> even if they add some new features.
>
> Yes, the RHEL releases are akin to the service packs of MS Windows. You'll
> get some new features and a few changes, but it'll still be the same basic
> system. Fedora releases are more like moving from Windows XP to Vista, or
> more precisely, from a reasonably mature Windows XP to a Beta release of
> Vista.
>
My comment was joke - RHEL releases don't come out every 4-6 months (not
for a major version anyway).
I do wish though that EPEL had a better policy, there have been several
occasions when I have had had to recompile something of my own for the
simple reason that EPEL versioned a shared library.
The Firefox 1.5 to 3.0 move in RHEL was at least understandable, there
was good reason for that, but some of the EPEL changes - I think they
leave it to the discretion of the packager but it's annoying.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
