At Thu, 01 Apr 2010 12:29:26 -0500 CentOS mailing list <centos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 4/1/2010 12:08 PM, R-Elists wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I thought 4 was too buggy compared to 3 and held off
> >> upgrading most machines until 5 was out. In retrospect that
> >> still seems like it was a good move even if most of the
> >> problems in 4 were eventually fixed in updates. But with
> >> many years elapsing between releases, skipping a version like
> >> that may not be possible again.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Les Mikesell
> >
> > Les,
> >
> > what was buggy for you?
> >
> > internet facing or just internal servers?
> >
> > centos and the centos team have been rock solid for us in dealing with
> > CentOS 4 on our servers.
>
> I can't remember the exact details. Some of it had to do with mod_perl
> and the assortment of other perl modules needed for RT, Twiki, and some
*I* ended up using the standalone HTTP server for RT and populated the
missing perl mods from rpmforge.
> other applications. And maybe the mysql version was wrong for something
CentOSPlus is needed for a *proper* version of mysql AND PHP for Joomla!
and WordPress.
> I wanted to run. A lot of the things weren't technically broken, just
> not particularly good version choices for their time. I may have had
> some driver problems with a Dell raid controller or firewire too, but I
CentOSPlus has the firewire drivers...
> could be confusing it with Fedora 5 in the same timeframe. Anyway, as
> soon as 5.x was out it seemed much easier to deal with. There are still
> a few Centos 4's in the company that someone else maintains so I guess
> they are OK if you stick to the included software and don't need mod_perl.
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software -- Download the Model Railroad System
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows
heller@xxxxxxxxxxxx -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
