On 02/11/2011 11:35 AM, Matthias Schroeder wrote:
> On 02/11/2011 06:00 PM, Larry Vaden wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Ewan Mac Mahon<[log in to unmask]>   wrote:
>>> I'm a little bit hazy on the details, but there are some slides from the
>>> meeting here[1]:
>>>    http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=8&sessionId=1&resId=1&materialId=slides&confId=106641
>> Troy,
>>
>> Ewan's URL says, in part:
>>
>> • 5.6 release history:
>> – RedHat released RHEL 5.6 on 13-Jan
>> – CERN released SLC 5.6 on 20-Jan
>> – FNAL released SL 5.6 last week
>> • CERN rolled out SLC 5.6 on desktops and central systems around 28-Jan
>>
>> Is this correct or incorrect?
>
> That is a question of definition. For SLC, most of the packages that
> make up SLC5.6 have been released, but the installer is still in
> testing. In that state it is almost 5.6, but it is not yet called 5.6.
> For SLC everything is 'rolling', the individual minor releases are not
> maintained as such, so there is no way to stay with eg 5.3 and only get
> security updates for it. That is a feature of SLC (watch for the 'C'!).
>
> HTH,
>
> Matthias
>

I can't speak for CERN at all, so I'm glad that Matthias answered that.

FNAL did *not* release SL 5.6.
We put out an Alpha release.  That is not a final release, but it did 
have the rebuilt RHEL packages, except for one stuborn one.

>> (read: my curiosity is killing me based on what I read here.}
>>
>> My presumption is that non-government use of SL is permitted if not
>> welcome;  feel free to correct me on that.
>>

You are correct.

Troy


-- 
__________________________________________________
Troy Dawson  [log in to unmask]  (630)840-6468
Fermilab  ComputingDivision/SCF/FEF/SLSMS Group
__________________________________________________