SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL Archives

March 2014

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL@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:
Connie Sieh <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Connie Sieh <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 25 Mar 2014 18:12:39 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines)
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014, Karanbir Singh wrote:

> On 03/25/2014 12:48 PM, Andras Horvath wrote:
>> Would this mean that the support of the minor branches would end and 
>> only the most recent minor version would get the long term support? If 
>> so, then I strongly believe that one of the most precious advantages of 
>> SL would disappear - compared to CentOS AFAIK.
>>
>>
>
> How do these point releases map to RHEL point releases ? And what level
> of testing is done to ensure sanity within that point release in SL ?
>
>

RHEL 6.1 -->  SL 6.1
RHEL 6.2 -->  SL 6.2

We "repoclose" everything to verify that all packages dependencies can be 
met within a point release, including fastbugs and security errata.  We 
also test selected packages to make sure they work within a point release.

-Connie Sieh

ATOM RSS1 RSS2