On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 00:04, Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Once upon a time, Daniel Roesen <dr@xxxxxxxxxx> said: > > On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 08:31:46AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > > redhat would end up "supporting" > > > 5-6 releases (going back ~3 years @ ~ 6 month innovation cycle), which > > > would be unmanageable. Is that really what you want? > > > > Yes, it is what I want. But obviously nothing Red Hat does provide > > (anymore). > > AFAIK nobody provides that. When I looked a while back, most of the > free OS distributions only commit to 1 year of updates for a particular > release. The commercial OS vendors have longer support, but don't have > full new releases as often. Debian supports each version until the next one is released. That is usually much longer than one year. Of course the down-side as far as Daniel is concerned is the lack of regular updates. I think that the release schedule of RHEL is pretty good. Waiting one year for the latest feature isn't such a big deal (IMHO). Let's face facts, if you use the new features as soon as they are released by the upstream developers then you will discover that most of them don't work anyway. The release schedule for RHEL is quite aggressive when you consider all the new stuff that's going in! -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
