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 __________________________________________________