SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

August 2012

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: SL 6 vs. other RHEL clones: security advisory comparison
From:
Karanbir Singh <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Karanbir Singh <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 20 Aug 2012 23:55:14 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines) 
On 08/20/2012 11:38 PM, Ian wrote:
>>> b) delays in issuing bug fixes are good for you - no delay means they
>>>     did not test the stuff before pushing it out.
>> FUD
> Lol. Karanbir, how are you able to release something derived from
> Redhat, at the same time as Redhat (i.e. without a delay) and do your
> own simultaneous testing? Quantum computing?

you are over simplifying the process. Eg. What was the time lag from
when the srpm was released and the rhn notes published to when CentOS
released that specific update ?

> Not FUD at all... in fact, it is a truism.

Workout the answer to the question above and look back at previous
threads on this list about the same thing. The OP is nothing but FUD.


-- 
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
ICQ: 2522219    | Yahoo IM: z00dax      | Gtalk: z00dax
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

ATOM RSS1 RSS2