SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

January 2014

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:
From:
Reply To:
Date:
Tue, 7 Jan 2014 20:53:09 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (66 lines)
Here is a good discussion of it from a Fedora viewpoint with links to
more information. Read the FAQ. It's huge and informative.

http://wordshack.wordpress.com/2014/01/07/centos-welcome/

Little changes other than slightly faster updates for Centos. This should
speed things up for SL as well.

(There is some discussion of this event on the Fedora list. The post with
the above link is the cream of the crop, so far.)

{^_^}   Joanne

On 2014/01/07 19:43, Jamie Duncan wrote:
> "so RH wants to get new versions of selected apps faster to the RHEL than if
> they were going thru current Fedora -> RHEL route?
> am i reading this right?"
>
> no, not at all, I don't think.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Andrew Z <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>     so RH wants to get new versions of selected apps faster to the RHEL than if
>     they were going thru current Fedora -> RHEL route?
>     am i reading this right?
>
>
>     On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 10:07 PM, ~Stack~ <[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>         On 01/07/2014 08:27 PM, Steven Haigh wrote:
>          > On 8/01/2014 1:08 PM, Steven Miano wrote:
>          >> So how does that impact Scientific Linux?
>          >
>          > In a nutshell? It doesn't.
>
>         I don't think it will hurt Scientific at all and from what I have been
>         reading it might make things easier and better. I (as a non-dev user, so
>         take this opinion accordingly) see two things that might help:
>         1) the hidden process of how CentOS rebuilds the SRPMs is being opened
>         up which should make CentOS even close to their binary-equivalent goal.
>         2) the variant ( http://centos.org/variants/ ) might actually make
>         things easier if Scientific just wanted to start with a core base and
>         build from there. I am sure there are going to be a dozen different
>         spin-offs of CentOS for this reason alone.
>
>         There are still a TON of details yet to be given, so we will see what is
>         actually delivered, but this is great news for the community as a whole.
>         Here is hoping that it makes things easier and better! Cheers!
>
>
>         ~Stack~
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Jamie Duncan
> @jamieeduncan
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2