Yes, for better or worse, that's part of "binary compatible". If you need bugs fixed faster than RedHat is fixing them, you need to fix them yourself, or get someone else to. Sometimes you can find newer versions with fixes in other public repos, but again, the onus is on you to provide the fix in your environment. That's true regardless of which RHEL-based distro you're using.
________________________________ From: owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov <owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov> on behalf of Jon Pruente <jprue...@riskanalytics.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2021 11:45 To: larry.lin...@micro-controls.com <larry.lin...@micro-controls.com> Cc: Nick Matchett <nick.match...@trilliant.com>; scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov <scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov>; Edmund Manabat <edmund.mana...@trilliant.com> Subject: Re: Scientific Linux Advice Caution: EXTERNAL email On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 11:32 AM Larry Linder <00000dea520dd180-dmarc-requ...@listserv.fnal.gov<mailto:00000dea520dd180-dmarc-requ...@listserv.fnal.gov>> wrote: We tried Alma, and Rock and they contain the fatel install flwas IBM invented with 7. and up. Alma is just the same as RH 8.x complete with flaws and booby traps. I pointed this out to the Alma people and thy shot the messenger. You were barking up the wrong tree. Alma and Rocky are *supposed* to be bug-for-bug compatible rebuilds of Red Hat. Complaining that they replicated the bugs of Red Hat is actually a compliment.
