>
> This week's FLOSS Weekly interview is about ClearOS (audio/video at
> http://twit.tv/floss168). Apparently they have taken the CentOS
> developer's frequently given advice to go away and do it yourself and
> will have a 'ClearOS core' release that is their own rebuild from Red
> Hat s
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] xferlog not rotating.
> To: centos@centos.org
> Message-ID: <20110520144308.ga23...@bludgeon.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:44:49AM -0400, Steven Crothers wrote:
> > It's a bit funny that logrotate is difficult to fix
>
> And do us a favor? Take your own advice.
>
I always try to state "as far as I know", "as far as I can tell", "in my
opinion/belief".
Can we recall that I commented on the fact that a major Linux magazine had put
up a pretty damning article. I don't know why I am getting attacked for
- Original Message
> From: John R. Dennison
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Thu, 21 April, 2011 2:58:36
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 08:29:07PM +0100, Ian Murray wrote:
> >
> > I have it black and white in a
> It sounds to me like "your big beef" is that you can't run the CentOS
> distribution the way *you* want it run. Whether you agree or not,
> doesn't change the fact that CentOS *is* enterprise ready.-- and many
> enterprises use it. The only time there are significant delays in
No, I would
- Original Message
> From: Ron Blizzard
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Thu, 21 April, 2011 1:59:19
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Ian Murray wrote:
>
> > Seriously, just skip over my posts. I am no
- Original Message
> From: Garry Dale
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Thu, 21 April, 2011 1:37:33
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
>
> (someone) wrote:
> > Why does the website say something so different, then?
>
> Seriously? Are people really this retarded?
Retarded
- Original Message
> From: John R. Dennison
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Thu, 21 April, 2011 1:01:22
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:31:04PM +0100, Ian Murray wrote:
> >
> > Seriously, just skip over my
- Original Message
> From: John R Pierce
> To: centos@centos.org
> Sent: Wed, 20 April, 2011 23:04:50
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
>
> On 04/20/11 2:51 PM, Ian Murray wrote:
> >
> >> Is ther
> But to allude to
> him as a respected industry member is greatly stretching things when
> every article that mentions CentOS is disparaging and I can't recall any
> article even ending on a positive note.
Try google: http://lwn.net/Articles/123934/
(For the record, I couldn't find any p
- Original Message
> From: Lamar Owen
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Wed, 20 April, 2011 21:32:35
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
>
> On Wednesday, April 20, 2011 03:29:07 PM Ian Murray wrote:
> > My big beef has always been that the website
>
> Is there anything else relevant to add?
> ___
Yeah, please can someone fix the front-page to better reflect the distribution
for what it is, rather than the sales pitch that is there now. Not everyone has
read about it ad nausem on this list.
>
> No. News reporting is about picking up and distilling the sentiment
> of what's going on. The article has done that. It doesn't have to be
> a complete factual research project with totally "fair and balanced"
> chances for everyone to have their say. If the Devs had responded,
> tha
>
> Respected? I can't recall a single article of his that mentioned CentOS
> that wasn't disparaging. I find such one-sided and opinionated writings
> hard to respect.
>
Okay, maybe that was an assumption too far in regards to "respect".
Perhaps not so one-sided if he had received an ema
>
> Here's a more objective view from Linux Mag:
>
> http://www.linux-mag.com/id/8608/?hq_e=el&hq_m=1231269&hq_l=12&hq_v=41484763bd
>
> If you have trouble with the link, some relevant quotes:
>
Wow, that must smart. Still, should come as no surprise as it has all been said
on here before...
> I am sure if you do then you will have a mailing list on which your
> fanbois can post that they want to give you money.
>
> But this list is not for that purpose.
>
Once again an unnecessary personal attack. If anybody round here has fanbois,
the CentOS devs! Not language I would normal
- Original Message
> From: "aurfal...@gmail.com"
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Tue, 12 April, 2011 20:10:14
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Dag's RHEL Rebuild Project.
>
> On Apr 12, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Ian Murray wrote:
>
> >
> >
>
> This is really disrespectful to talk about on here. The devs spent a ton of
> their spare time to develop centos, last thing you should talk about is
> starting competing projects...
>
> Peter.
Erm, the dev(s) *suggested* using an alternative distribution. The stated aims
are different,
>
> The goal of the centos project is to produce an RPM that is exactly like
> the upstream RPM in every way that is legally possible.
>
> The checks we do look at libraries that binaries link to, size of the
> packages and a list of the files the RPM installs.
>
> We would like for all RP
- Original Message
> From: Kai Schaetzl
> To: centos@centos.org
> Sent: Fri, 8 April, 2011 13:37:19
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] STOP THIS THREAD NOW!
>
> STOP IT!
>
> Kai
If we carry on long enough, Godwin's Law will kick-in and that will be the end
of it. I have had to bite my tong
>
> As I seem to have started this little subsection of the thread, please
> let me give just one small example to help clarify the situation as it
> appears there is still a lot of misunderstanding surrounding this issue.
>
> Let's look at kernel modules, kmod packages. They are built ag
> > I'm really tired of this.
> >
> > Ralph: please unsubscribe everyone who can't shut his mouth. Thanks.
> > A lot of of less-vocal people will thank you.
> >
> >
> > Kai
> >
> >
> > ___
> >
>
>
> Wow Kai, maybe you should suspend the mailing l
> > John, please stop cluttering the list with your complaining. It's
> > making a right mess for those of that wish to discuss the project and
> > its direction.
>
> Wow. Pot? Kettle? So, let me get this straight. People are
> able to bitch, whine, complain and needlessly threat
>
> http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=16
> specifically item #2 in guidelines. Here, let me summarize it
> for you: "Do Not Top Post".
KB top posted yesterday. Did you correct him? Thought not. If your going to be
anything, please be fair.
>
> If you
- Original Message
> From: R P Herrold
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Thu, 7 April, 2011 21:58:08
> Subject: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
>
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2011, Ian Murray wrote:
>
> > hair is best cut. My bakery has refused to sell me sliced bread b
>
> Actually I just finished an email to Connie and Troy over at
> SL, sharing some detail on project management with them
>
> They are each friends, and it does not cause me a moment's
> pain or raised blood pressure when SL is mentioned or when
> someone 'threatens' to use their project
>
> If you do not like how your hairdresser does you hair you will go to
> other one. If you do not like the taste of bread you are buying, you
> will go and by from other bakery.
I have never been insulted or belittled by my hairdresser as we discuss how my
hair is best cut. My bakery h
> If you WANT a service level agreement with me, then you may contract for
> one. If you pay me enough, I will guarantee you updates on what ever
> schedule you are willing to pay for. I will be very professional in my
> dealings with you in that case too.
>
> When you want something that
- Original Message
> From: Radu Gheorghiu
> To: centos@centos.org
> Sent: Thu, 7 April, 2011 16:55:49
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
>
> On 04/07/2011 06:49 PM, Ian Murray wrote:
> >
> >>> These people are priceless and don
> > These people are priceless and don't deserve to be
> > submitted to the harshness we have been witnessing lately.
And everyone else is worthless and deserve the rudeness handed out by the devs?
Why don't you make comment on that or is that perfectly acceptable because of
"who they are?"
>
> On 04/06/2011 09:30 PM, Ian Murray wrote:
> > As previously stated, "in-reply-to" isn't a mandatory field as far as I can
> > tell, so it is a stretch to call it "broken". However, now that someone
>actually
> > stopped the time-wa
> On 04/06/2011 03:19 PM, Ian Murray wrote:
> >> firstly, get a better email client. Your existing one is broken.
> > Irrelevant, unhelpful and quite rude.
>
> mailing lists are setup to retain thread sanity, its expected people use
> mailclients that can honour
- Original Message
> From: Kai Schaetzl
> To: centos@centos.org
> Sent: Wed, 6 April, 2011 17:15:27
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
>
> Your mail is broken because it doesn't contain correct threading headers
> (In-Reply-To). Because of that it just threads "everywhere" in
o send back to Yahoo.
Assuming it wasn't just a very cheap and childish shot, of course.
Obviously it wasn't so broken that you weren't able to read or reply my mail. I
can't imagine what terrible hardship it has caused you.
>
> On 04/06/2011 12:55 PM, Ian Murray wrote
> Thats a very good question, and something more people should be asking
> : here is a terse reply : adopt a part of the distro, contribute tests
> and take ownership of driving support for those components forward ( so,
> wiki content, support in irc channels and support for users on those
>
- Original Message -
> From:Kai Schaetzl
>
> > This thread or others like it will continue
>
> wrong. It will continue as long people bite. Stop biting the bait!
>
> Kai
Oh, the irony Likewise.
Somebody will still keep coming onto ask the questions, esp. non-regular list
use
- Original Message -
> From:Kai Schaetzl
> To:centos@centos.org
> Cc:
> Sent:Tuesday, 5 April 2011, 13:21
> Subject:Re: [CentOS] KILL THIS THREAD ( Centos 6 Update?)
>
> +100
>
> Kai
Anybody that thinks this thread can be "killed" is so badly mis-understanding
the situation.
>
> What the CentOS project would be interested in (from a corporate
> provider) would be to hire people and allow them to do CentOS related
> things.
>
> We are not interested in being paid in addition to our current work, but
> making taking care of CentOS our only work.
>
> There are many t
>
> What makes you think CentOS is not willing to be commercially sponsored?
> (Or only work developing CentOS?)
>
> I would LOVE to be able to do CentOS as my only job.
>
> No one that we know of is willing to pay a full time salary for 1 or 2
> or 3 people to develop CentOS. If they would p
>There have been a number of recent conversations on the developer list and
>this list about CentOS. My initial thought was why not have CentOS and SL
>merge. Since they have different goals I can understand the reason not to.
>So my next question is, has no corporate entity offered to spons
--- On Thu, 3/3/11, John R. Dennison wrote:
> From: John R. Dennison
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 - What are you looking forward to?
> To: "Digimer"
> Cc: "CentOS mailing list" , "David Sommerseth"
>
> Date: Thursday, 3 March, 2011, 20:55
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 10:11:52AM
> -0500, Dig
>
> > I know the development team is furiously working to get 5.6 out the door
> > so I understand that there will be delays. However, it was my
> > understanding that "Critical" security updates and those that are
> > "remotely exploitable" would be pushed out ahead of 5.6.
>
> That is my
Are they paravirt of HVM guests? qemu might have something to do with it if HVM
guests are involved.
- Original Message
> From: Rudi Ahlers
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Tue, 22 February, 2011 23:29:29
> Subject: [CentOS] how to optimize CentOS XEN dom0?
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a p
> I think 8 million unique machines disagree with you assessment. Who
> knows, maybe all 8 million are wrong and the 10-20 people who are
> discussing it on this list are right.
Man, you could build a killer botnet if you wanted to!! (which strengthens your
argument about the point about t
- Original Message
> From: "m.r...@5-cent.us"
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Tue, 22 February, 2011 20:08:21
> Subject: [CentOS] was: Re: Any update on 5.6 / 6?, is please kill for
> another
>month
>
> Can we *please* kill this thread, which has run on *far* too long, till at
>
> Calling it Enterprise is important because doing so establishes the
> *origin* and the *objective* of the work: a BUG-FOR-BUG-IDENTICAL
> de-branding/re-branding of Red Hat ENTERPRISE Linux.
How about BugforbugIdenticaldebreandingrebrandingofupstreamenterpriselinuxOS?
Only joking. I t
>
> No one is taking you wrong here;
Did you check with everybody before you spoke for them all?
> How about the project
> renames the distribution to "IfYouDontLikeItYouAreNotForcedToUseItOS"?
That is a fantastic idea because IMHO it would be a much fairer assessment of
the
- Original Message
> From: Barry Brimer
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Mon, 21 February, 2011 21:12:57
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Air Conditioning - ON!
>
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2011, Ian Murray wrote:
>
> > Plus, rename to something that doesn't suggest
>
> 2. Add more staff. As a small business owner, the very last thing you
> want to do is add more staff when you are in a slammed state. It takes
> all of the 'productive' workers time to train the new staff and output
> slows to a crawl.
..
>
> Seeing as how we are currently dealing with 2 trees in the QA directory
> for testing right now (4.9 and 5.6) ... 6.0 will be waiting until we get
> those out of QA.
>
>
I recall discussing this off-list with Johnny, like a year and a half ago (Wed,
12 August, 2009 14:25:18)
I said...
>
> Now Fred had read this book about how adding farmers to a field won't
> necessarily make the fruit grow any faster. Maybe it's true, he
> thought. Some of the experienced farmers had already been helping
> anyway, so that was something.
Perhaps Fred confused people by calling his fruit
> "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in
> his home."
Google thinks the same, don't they?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
> [herr...@stones herrold]$ telnet 178.63.65.136 25
> Trying 178.63.65.136...
> Connected to 178.63.65.136.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 mercury.localdomain ESMTP Postfix
> quit
> 221 2.0.0 Bye
> Connection closed by foreign host.
> [herr...@stones herrold]$
>
> Something between you
> No the example above shows a telnet to port 25 connecting - which I can
> reproduce too - but there is no 220 response as there should be from a
I am late to the thread (and I haven't a clue what we are talking about in
fact), but I get a 220 when I telnet into that IP address...
Escape
I
> was planning to evaluate devical, but have not tried it yet:
> href="http://www.davical.org/"; target=_blank
> >http://www.davical.org/
I would welcome comments from anyone with
> experience with devical.
DAViCal is excellent. Perhaps more at home on a Debian based disty, but can be
in
>yes exactly that is what i need to do murrayei
>could you describe a little more
If 'B' in my previous description is a single machine, need not route and the A
to C issue goes away.
My OpenVPN/Iptables skills are not strong enough to describe it in general
terms and has been previously stat
>i am looking to open vpn remote page now do you know where could i set
>client's sites that allow to connect or not ?
I can't remember if there are other controls, but AFAIK the primary method of
saying who is allowed is via certificates that you create when setting it up.
It is still unclear
> http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/PXE , maybe it's a bit easier to
> download full centos dvd and install from it?
It's a hardware issue with the server drive. Having said that, the CentOS net
install CD is pretty small, so server's drive might read it enough to get
going...
___
- Original Message
> From: "aurfal...@gmail.com"
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Thu, 21 January, 2010 20:07:27
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] trouble shooting slow ssh logins
>
> > aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I noticed that my ssh logins to a particular server were
- Original Message
> From: Adrian Sevcenco
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Sat, 16 January, 2010 15:27:12
> Subject: [CentOS] raid1 creation :: not large enough to join array
>
> Hi!
> I have 2 identical hdd (1002FBYS) with the same firmware, etc .. really
> identical! when i try to
>The dates are likely based on when the ISO was actually created. Therefore,
>if the ISO was generated on Oct. 1st and no issues were found with it in QA,
>then the date you are seeing on the mirrors is correct. The ISOs are based on
>the original 5.4 tree and don't include updates that Red H
Irrespective of the discussions about the release procedure and visibility,
etc, I'd like to thank everyone that put effort into making the CentOS 5.4
release happen..
I know I won't be alone in wishing to express thanks.
___
CentOS mailing l
> Here's the way I'm going to take care of the "problem." Figure eight
> weeks out for CentOS from the time Red Hat is released. If it gets
> done quicker than that, I've got a bonus.!
...and ignore any "announcements" in the meantime, as they may be red-herrings?
Take a "I'll believe it when I
stall.
No clue how or why the .dup_orig file came to be.
Thanks,
Ian.
- Original Message
> From: Karanbir Singh
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Thursday, 17 September, 2009 9:20:01
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Xen Kernel 2.6.18-164 and Hypervisor 3.3.1 problem.
>
>
> > Where did you get the hypervisor from and what version are you running?
>
> This is the CentOs list, and I tend to run my stuff as close to the
> distro tree as possible.
Then that might be why we are having different experiences with the new kernel.
I'll take it to the Xen list.
Thanks
> I've got about a dozen machines which are running the -164 kernel in the
> dom0 with about 20 VM's running various kernels under there for i386 and
> x86_64 with no problems.
>
> your problem is most likely caused due to issues in the non CentOS
> components.
Thanks for the response.
Wher
Hi,
I just upgraded the my Dom0 kernel on my Xen machine and it failed to boot. The
hypervisor itself comes from the Gitco repository.
I couldn't catch the exact reason, other than it said something about no proper
root and failing to synch. It rebooted a second or so later and I can't seem to
- Original Message
> From: Jerry Geis
> To: CentOS ML
> Sent: Monday, 24 August, 2009 14:32:00
> Subject: [CentOS] self signing certificates
>
> hi all,
>
> I have gone through the process of self signing certificates.
> Aside from the pop-ups about not trusted etc... everything
- Original Message
> From: Kai Schaetzl
> To: centos@centos.org
> Sent: Friday, 21 August, 2009 10:31:22
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] virt-manager crashes Host during installation of guest
>
> Ian Murray wrote on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 02:09:04 + (GMT):
>
> > [r
- Original Message
> From: Kai Schaetzl
> To: centos@centos.org
> Sent: Thursday, 20 August, 2009 19:31:21
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] virt-manager crashes Host during installation of guest
>
> Ian Murray wrote on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:21:33 + (GMT):
>
>
- Original Message
> From: ann kok
> To: centos@centos.org
> Sent: Thursday, 20 August, 2009 15:10:09
> Subject: [CentOS] needs help about vps
>
> hi all
>
> anyone have experience about vps
>
> which one is better?
>
Depends what you are trying to do run multiple servers, or
>
> Again, I think this is the wrong way to go, it's outdated. I've never done
> it this way and I think this How-To is derived from very old Xen versions
> and got updated a few times over time without changing the basics. It
> *may* work, but it's complicated to follow and overly complex, e
> > This (and other replies) lead me to two possible culprits:
> > - either the graphical console over X11 is not a good idea (but I
> > can't imagine that, it shouldn't shoot the kernel)
> > - I always installed as a paravirtualized machine, Could it be that
> > the install-kernel on the 5.3
- Original Message
> From: Bernhard Gschaider
> To: centos@centos.org
> Sent: Tuesday, 18 August, 2009 18:56:36
> Subject: [CentOS] virt-manager crashes Host during installation of guest
>
>
> Hi!
>
> I have the following problem: I have a server (CentOS 5.3 x86_64) on
> which I wa
> There is a very large issue with all people running VPS machines that are
> waiting for upgrades.
Why are VPS's any more affected than bare-metal machines?
It will be greatly ironic if Redhat release the fix after they release 5.4, or
as part of 5.4. I will try not to say I told you so.
- Original Message
> From: Chan Chung Hang Christopher
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Friday, 14 August, 2009 10:00:41
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] OT: Fortunate clueless dd chum - lvm recovery
>
>
> >
> > First of all, I would dd a copy of the whole drive off to another drive, so
>
- Original Message
> From: Chan Chung Hang Christopher
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Sent: Friday, 14 August, 2009 3:31:32
> Subject: [CentOS] OT: Fortunate clueless dd chum - lvm recovery
>
> Looks like the chum did not have to lose any data.
>
> Wiping out the MBR and the next 63 blo
ard
On Aug 12, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Ian Murray wrote:
> If anybody feels they must send complaints, execute personal
> vendettas, issue death threats, etc please do it off-list.
actually, enforcing community norms in public is useful and important.
an off-list message educates only the
: Wednesday, 12 August, 2009 9:10:32
Subject: Re: [CentOS] [Off-list] Slow IDE on GeForce 8200 board
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ian Murray wrote:
> Okay, I stand corrected. Not new to the net, though... and I know
> threading is not done per subject. I just don't use list
This applies to 5.X as it stands, as 4.X. Once RH 5.4 hits the streets, then
CentOS 5 users will be in the same boat. I would hope nobody feels they are
getting beaten up about this. The intention is not to beat anybody up. Anyway,
I am going to try *really* hard not to post on the matter again
Thanks for the response. Unfortunately /dev/hda was unavailable after I tried
that.
From: Mogens Kjaer
To: CentOS mailing list
Sent: Wednesday, 12 August, 2009 6:29:16
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Slow IDE on GeForce 8200 board
On 08/12/2009 01:34 AM, Ian Murray
You are probably right there. I lost interest in Linux for ages because of what
RH did. It was CentOS that re-ignited my interest. I felt like I could 'get
back' what I had lost when Redhat killed RHL. I didn't 'get' the security
implications of the rebuild stuff til it was explained to me the o
I believe it is better to make
a different choice of distro, than to ask for substantial changes in the
current one, especially if other people should do that extra work for you.
Believe what you like, but I believe it's better to raise my concern for
discussion in the first instance. For the
_
From: Alexander Georgiev
To: CentOS mailing list
Sent: Tuesday, 11 August, 2009 8:57:17
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Slow IDE on GeForce 8200 board
2009/8/11 Ian Murray :
> In my haste for help, I stupidly hit reply and changed the subject which I
> thought was enough for a new message, not giving
respect at least.
From: Ron Blizzard
To: CentOS mailing list
Sent: Tuesday, 11 August, 2009 22:06:05
Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Ian Murray wrote:
>
>>
>> Part of
>
>
>
>
>Long live the kings
>
>
>-Ray
I must admit, may be I missed something here, but there seems to be quite a bit
of outpouring of appreciation on this thread. I am sure that all that give up
their time and effort to make CentOS happen really deserve all the thanks and
appreciation they g
diately returning.
From: Kai Schaetzl
To: centos@centos.org
Sent: Tuesday, 11 August, 2009 10:31:21
Subject: Re: [CentOS] [Off-list] Slow IDE on GeForce 8200 board
Ian Murray wrote on Tue, 11 Aug 2009 05:51:05 + (GMT):
> I hit reply and changed the s
In my haste for help, I stupidly hit reply and changed the subject which I
thought was enough for a new message, not giving much thought for the
threading, etc. So apologies for the hijack, although I would think it fairly
obvious that it wasn't deliberate or obvious to me... or a big deal reall
I have a system who's normal activity is running Xen 3.3.1 with Centos 5.3 as
the DomU. I had reason to connect an IDE drive to the single IDE interface that
this board has. I was getting slow performance. hdparm -t revealed that the
thoughput was down to just 2.7 MB/sec. After some tweaking (
Well, I know I have benefited from the discussion because I understand the
challenges that face the CentOS team with regards to security updates whilst
they are rebuilding a point release. As has been pointed out to me, we're
between a rock and a hard-place and it isn't just a simple matter of n
hnny Hughes
To: CentOS mailing list
Sent: Sunday, 9 August, 2009 13:54:50
Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Johnny Hughes wrote:
> Ian Murray wrote:
> WRT to the one valid issue that you raise ... let me explain the
> TECHNICAL reason why you can not release these things
>
>People who do not understand the technical issues involved do not see
>why we can't just snap our fingers and put out the packages ... well, we
>can't.
What you explain makes perfect sense and so thanks for taking the time to
explain. I was only basing my understanding on what Karanbir wrote
<< I've rambled on too long. But seriously, what is you want? CentOS is a
great Linux distribution, so what's the problem? >>
The 'progress' I am talking about it making those 4 million installs into 5
million installs, if that is important. (I wish 4 mill installs hadn't been
raised, because
> 4 million unique machines do not agree with you, regardless of what you
> want to believe.
I don't think the machines have an opinion, either way. :o) Seriously, I
suppose you are using the '4 million machines we must be doing something right'
argument which is fair comment, if perhaps a to
I can't say I have been following this thread in its entirety, but the beauty
(?) of free speech is that even the ill-informed get to have a say. :o)
Anyway, I think there is a general problem with the name Community ENterprise
OS. Well, Community can't refer to us users because every O/S has a
d and it's working fine for
what I wanted.
From: Ned Slider
To: CentOS mailing list
Sent: Tuesday, 14 July, 2009 23:54:15
Subject: Re: [CentOS] modern motherboard for centos-5
Scott Silva wrote:
> on 7-6-2009 2:50 AM Ian Murray spake the following:
>
I think these drivers were merged into a the kernel a bit later in the kernel
than CentOS uses, although am a bit surprised upstream didn't backport. Before
I set the machine up for proper, I tried a live Ubuntu disk which recognised
the ethernet no problem, which lead me to figuring out what to
Well, despite what you say about ASUS, I recently bought an M3N78-VM
(http://www.ebuyer.com/product/152752 - although the net card specs are wrong)
because it was cheap and it supported 8gb. The only problem was the lack for
forcedeth drivers in standard CentOS, which I download from somewhere e
98 matches
Mail list logo
