On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 17:10, Stephen John Smoogen <smo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 16:22, Christopher Cox <chris...@endlessnow.com> > wrote: > >> We are converting from CentOS to AlmaLinux, but noticed that AlmaLinux >> versions >> are just 8.5, where CentOS adopted the idea of an extra qualifier >> representing a >> "level" within the version >> >> For example in CentOS 8, you see: >> >> CentOS Linux release 8.5.2111 >> >> > The extra qualifier is not a level, but represents the date of the release > of code from upstream to CentOS and the build process going on (21 -> 2021, > 11 -> November). That worked ok for CentOS because it has a solid > date/timeline from Red Hat to do this. Alma and Rocky really don't have > such and while it was nice, it seems to break various compliance checkers > and such which only expect the Red Hat lower number. [The lack of it > probably also breaks sites which expect it there for rebuilds.] > > Side note, the number does not change over time and so doesn't really signify anything other than the code release date of the .dot release from Red Hat. It's inclusion was mostly a political fight where some people only wanted a date and others wanted a dot number to match Red Hat Enterprise Linux. > > >> Could something like that be done in AlmaLinux? It can help identify the >> "level" within the release with regards to updates. >> >> Wasn't sure the best place for this, I mean it's not a "bug", it's more >> like an >> enhancement, but not even that. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Devel mailing list -- devel@lists.almalinux.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.almalinux.org >> > > > -- > Stephen J Smoogen. > Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle. > -- Ian MacClaren > -- Stephen J Smoogen. Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle. -- Ian MacClaren
