SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

June 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:
Yasha Karant <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Yasha Karant <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 24 Jun 2014 22:29:41 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
On 06/24/2014 09:26 PM, S.Tindall wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-06-24 at 20:28 -0700, Yasha Karant wrote:
>
>> Is the above zstream mechanism available for SL6.5 to SL7x migration? If
>> not, is there to be a functional equivalent?
> Red Hat has not historically released z-stream sources.
>
> There is some talk in the centos project of cobbling together a
> Fedora-like pre-upgrade package, which is what I assume Red Hat is
> describing.
>
> In a production environment, it would be insane to take that path.
>
> Steve
I was not referring to the Fedora mechanism.  Some licensed-for-fee 
commercial unix environments (not linux) used on primary servers allow 
for major release upgrade in place.
Does the Red Hat method that is mentioned by Red Hat allow for this, or 
is the Red Hat enterprise z-stream "insane" to use in a production 
situation?

If it is not insane but actually is effective, are there no Linux or GPL 
encumbrances on z-stream that "force" Red Hat to release the source?

Yasha Karant

ATOM RSS1 RSS2