Sam Trenholme wrote:
* As mentioned before, Scientific Linux 6.0 is out. What hasn't been
mentioned here is that while SL 5.6 hasn't come out, 5.6 security
updates are being backported to SL 5.5. Ditto with SL 4 (no 4.9 but
security patches look current)
And we try very hard not to rel
>> * As mentioned before, Scientific Linux 6.0 is out. What hasn't been
>> mentioned here is that while SL 5.6 hasn't come out, 5.6 security
>> updates are being backported to SL 5.5. Ditto with SL 4 (no 4.9 but
>> security patches look current)
>>
> And we try very hard not to release things unt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 23, 2011 09:56:34 am Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> Understood. I'd like to replicate or examine the error. "Building it
>> yourself", without that access to your unique build environment or a
>> way to gracefully replicate it,
On Wednesday, March 23, 2011 09:56:34 am Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> Understood. I'd like to replicate or examine the error. "Building it
> yourself", without that access to your unique build environment or a
> way to gracefully replicate it, represents dozens or hundreds of
> man-hours for each con
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> It takes hours to analyze all the packages in a build ... I do not have
> hours to spend on doing it for SL ... but here is another error that I
> found in the SL tree when figuring out build issues in the CentOS 5.6 tree:
Which is why opening the proce
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 03/23/2011 07:53 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> Ouch. Johnny, I'd really like to replicate this error, but I just
>> don't have the visibility into your build configurations. Saying "it's
>> easy to do yourself" doesn't work, because the
On 03/23/2011 07:53 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:42 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
>>
>> And then looking at the reason for the fails:
>>
>> Differing package requirements certmonger-0.30-4.el5.x86_64.rpm.out:
>> --- work/SL-req 2011-03-23 02:53:25.0 -0500
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:42 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
> And then looking at the reason for the fails:
>
> Differing package requirements certmonger-0.30-4.el5.x86_64.rpm.out:
> --- work/SL-req 2011-03-23 02:53:25.0 -0500
> +++ work/RHEL-req 2011-03-23 02:53:25.0 -0
On 03/22/2011 08:37 AM, Sam Trenholme wrote:
> Hello everyone:
>
> * DNS does not have a "refresh rate". In DNS, the person running the
> domain determines what the "refresh rate" (it's called TTL in DNS) for
> their records is; for example, Google has a TTL of "once per hour" and
> my domains (m
Hello everyone:
* DNS does not have a "refresh rate". In DNS, the person running the
domain determines what the "refresh rate" (it's called TTL in DNS) for
their records is; for example, Google has a TTL of "once per hour" and
my domains (maradns.org, etc.) have a TTL of one day.
* As mentioned
10 matches
Mail list logo
