] On
Behalf Of Les Mikesell
Sent: Thursday, 15 December 2011 10:58 a.m.
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Using an MS Access database from CentOS release 5.7
(Final)
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Ron Young ronyo...@nc.rr.com wrote:
@Work requires me to manipulate the MS Access
On 12/14/11 6:05 PM, Smithies, Russell wrote:
I can connect Perl to Microsoft SQL Server using Sybase drivers it so might
work with Access.
Parts of this might be useful:http://www.peceny.de/misc/freetds.html
Access native databases use the 'Jet' database engine, and they are
files accessed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ron Young said the following on 14/12/11 22:21:
@Work requires me to manipulate the MS Access database (mdb) file located
on an XP box that is an integral part of a third party application that is
central to the business.
Does anyone have
On 12/15/2011 05:45 AM, Luigi Rosa wrote:
I used mdbtools http://mdbtools.sourceforge.net/
This is also found in the epel repository.
Mogens
--
Mogens Kjaer, m...@lemo.dk
http://www.lemo.dk
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 09/15/2011 01:17 PM, m...@tdiehl.org wrote:
I realize everyone is busy but it would be nice to have at least the srpms
that were specific to the centos project with the release.
Are you able to find what you are looking for in Vault/5.7 ?
Yes,
On 09/15/2011 01:17 PM, m...@tdiehl.org wrote:
I realize everyone is busy but it would be nice to have at least the srpms
that were specific to the centos project with the release.
Are you able to find what you are looking for in Vault/5.7 ?
( more details on what the thinking behind this is,
Are you able to find what you are looking for in Vault/5.7 ?
Yes: http://vault.centos.org/5.7/os/SRPMS/
( more details on what the thinking behind this is, coming shortly )
I'm curious.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
Hi,
Is the centos-release srpm for 5.7 available anywhere. I have looked at several
mirrors but no srpms are to be found.
I realize everyone is busy but it would be nice to have at least the srpms
that were specific to the centos project with the release.
Regards,
--
Tom m
On 7/11/11, Always Learning cen...@u6.u22.net wrote:
Should the Centos Mailing List diversify into non-English language
versions ? For example, Chinese (which version?) , Spanish, Portuguese,
Russian, Serbian etc. etc. ?
For example: chin...@centos.org
Personally I think that would dilute
Centos 6.0 Release Notes are here
http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS6.0
Volunteers whose native (or first language) is not English are invited
to translate the Release Notes into their own language.
There are probably other useful translation tasks to make Centos
understandable
Hi there --
I just completed installing the 64-bit version of Release 5.5, and while the
installation and initial configuration
completed successfully, a full boot-up is never completed successfully. During
the system boot-up sequence
the list of services appears to complete, but then a blank
On 03/03/11 10:18 AM, Kaplan, Andrew H. wrote:
Hi there --
I just completed installing the 64-bit version of Release 5.5, and
while the installation and initial configuration
completed successfully, a full boot-up is never completed
successfully. During the system boot-up sequence
the
Op 22-05-10 22:36, Robert Heller schreef:
I am not sure if Gentoo or Debian even have 'point releases', at least
in the sense that RedHat has done things since way back when.
Debian has. Currently they're at 5.0.4.
Gentoo is a different matter altogether, their release system is to
volatile
On 05/22/2010 08:39 PM, Aniruddha wrote:
In CentOS there is an yum-security plugin which allows you to install
security updates only. If I understand correctly the preferred way
though is to do at least an yum upgrade every 6 months in order to
upgrade to a point release.
yum-security
Thanks all for the replies, this helped me a lot!
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote:
On 05/22/2010 08:39 PM, Aniruddha wrote:
In CentOS there is an yum-security plugin which allows you to install
security updates only. If I understand correctly the preferred way
though is to do at least an yum upgrade
Hi,
I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not
every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install
CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7 years? Or
is the preferred way to upgrade to each minor version? Thanks in
advance!
Relevant
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 08:09:22PM +0200, Aniruddha wrote:
Hi,
I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not
every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install
CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7 years? Or
is the preferred way to
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Aniruddha mailingdotl...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not
every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install
CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7 years? Or
is the
On May 22, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Aniruddha wrote:
Hi,
I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not
every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install
CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7 years? Or
is the preferred way to upgrade to
Thanks for the quick replies. I understand now that CentOS 5 and all
5.? versions are supported until 2014. How does this work with
security updates? Does each point release gets itś own security
updates? In other words is it possible to install
CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security
Aniruddha wrote:
Thanks for the quick replies. I understand now that CentOS 5 and all
5.? versions are supported until 2014. How does this work with
security updates? Does each point release gets itś own security
updates? In other words is it possible to install
CentOS 5.5 on a server and
On 05/22/2010 11:09 AM, Aniruddha wrote:
I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not
every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install
CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7 years?
No. As best I understand Red Hat's model, EL 5
Coming from Gentoo - Debian I am to trying to understand the way
CentOS works. In Debian very little happens in stable releases and you
use apt-get update to apply security updates and apt-get dist-upgrade
for a major upgrade.
In CentOS there is an yum-security plugin which allows you to install
... I understand now ...
No, you don't.
is it required to upgrade to each point release in order to continue
receiving security updates?
It's strictly linear and one-dimensional.
Point releases only mark a specific point in time, where you get a
little bit more, e.g. additional drivers, an
On 5/22/2010 3:39 PM, Aniruddha wrote:
Coming from Gentoo - Debian I am to trying to understand the way
CentOS works. In Debian very little happens in stable releases and you
use apt-get update to apply security updates and apt-get dist-upgrade
for a major upgrade.
In CentOS there is an
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Michael Lampe
la...@gcsc.uni-frankfurt.de wrote:
... I understand now ...
No, you don't.
is it required to upgrade to each point release in order to continue
receiving security updates?
It's strictly linear and one-dimensional.
Point releases only mark a
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 9:52 PM, William Warren
hescomins...@emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com wrote:
On 5/22/2010 3:39 PM, Aniruddha wrote:
Coming from Gentoo - Debian I am to trying to understand the way
CentOS works. In Debian very little happens in stable releases and you
use apt-get update
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Aniruddha mailingdotl...@gmail.com wrote:
I can imagine this works fine with vanilla CentOS, however is this
still possible when you enable third party repositories such as epel?
It varies on the repository, but for the most part the existing
repositories try
On May 22, 2010, at 2:23 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 05/22/2010 11:09 AM, Aniruddha wrote:
I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not
every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install
CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7
At Sat, 22 May 2010 21:39:46 +0200 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
Coming from Gentoo - Debian I am to trying to understand the way
CentOS works. In Debian very little happens in stable releases and you
use apt-get update to apply security updates and apt-get dist-upgrade
for
At Sat, 22 May 2010 21:03:49 +0200 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
Thanks for the quick replies. I understand now that CentOS 5 and all
5.? versions are supported until 2014. How does this work with
security updates? Does each point release gets itÅ own security
updates? In
At Sat, 22 May 2010 22:02:34 +0200 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 9:52 PM, William Warren
hescomins...@emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com wrote:
On 5/22/2010 3:39 PM, Aniruddha wrote:
Coming from Gentoo - Â Debian I am to trying to understand the way
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote:
Note: this is *very* different from how Ubuntu (for example) is
numbered. Base Ubuntu 'version' numbers are just the year.month of the
release: Ubuntu 10.4 is just the base release of April of 2010, it is
NOT the 4th
Another issue with trying to apply just security updates for older point
updates is that newer updates may be built differently. On 5.3, a package may
not require another package be installed. But at some point later on, say,
5.5, it may gain a dependency. So if you try to install it, it may
At Sat, 22 May 2010 16:49:49 -0400 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote:
Note: this is *very* different from how Ubuntu (for example) is
numbered. Â Base Ubuntu 'version' numbers are just the year.month of
On Saturday 22 May 2010 16:36:18 Robert Heller wrote:
Base Ubuntu 'version' numbers are just the year.month of the
release: Ubuntu 10.4 is just the base release of April of 2010
I didn't know that one! Interesting. Thanks Robert.
___
CentOS mailing
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote:
At Sat, 22 May 2010 16:49:49 -0400 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote:
Note: this is *very* different from how Ubuntu (for example)
Hi
One of our developers has come across an issue with the new release. He
provided this piece of code to show the problem:-
cat failure.c
#include /usr/include/asm-x86_64/msr.h
int main( int argc, char* argv[] )
{
return 0;
}
gcc failure.c
/usr/include/asm-x86_64/msr.h:169: error: expected
Philip Manuel wrote:
Hi
One of our developers has come across an issue with the new release. He
provided this piece of code to show the problem:-
snip
Anyone else seen this or found a bug with these function definitions ?
Yes, confirmed. You should file a bug.
on 5-14-2010 2:22 AM Tom Brown spake the following:
is there an estimate when centos 5.5 will be released?
as far as i knew it was out - at least it seemed to drop on me on the 10th
eg centos-release-5-5.el5.centos.x86_64.rpm
Remember... releases start to mirror before the official
yep, the release was pretty close ;-)
thanks guys!
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
is there an estimate when centos 5.5 will be released?
as far as i knew it was out - at least it seemed to drop on me on the 10th
eg centos-release-5-5.el5.centos.x86_64.rpm
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman
On 14 May 2010 10:22, Tom Brown t...@ng23.net wrote:
is there an estimate when centos 5.5 will be released?
as far as i knew it was out - at least it seemed to drop on me on the 10th
eg centos-release-5-5.el5.centos.x86_64.rpm
or more public
http://mirrors.dedipower.com/centos/5.5/os/x86_64
On 05/14/2010 11:40 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
403's yet on repodata and some other important bits... not all the
mirrors updated yet either (eg http://mirror.centos.org/centos-5/)
5.5 isnt 'out' yet, were working on getting it to a release stage by
close of play today.
- KB
2010/5/14 Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org:
On 05/14/2010 11:40 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
403's yet on repodata and some other important bits... not all the
mirrors updated yet either (eg http://mirror.centos.org/centos-5/)
5.5 isnt 'out' yet, were working on getting it to a release stage
On 14 May 2010 12:02, Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi wrote:
2010/5/14 Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org:
On 05/14/2010 11:40 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
403's yet on repodata and some other important bits... not all the
mirrors updated yet either (eg http://mirror.centos.org/centos-5/)
On 05/14/2010 12:02 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
5.5 isnt 'out' yet, were working on getting it to a release stage by
close of play today.
err: looks like 5.5 image is downloadable from:
Till such time as centos/5/ points to 5.5/ we strongly discourage people
from installing those isos.At the
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of
Karanbir Singh
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 6:17 AM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] release of 5.5? (filesystem troubles)
On 05/14/2010 12:02 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
5.5
On 05/14/2010 11:40 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
403's yet on repodata and some other important bits... not all the
mirrors updated yet either (eg http://mirror.centos.org/centos-5/)
5.5 isnt 'out' yet, were working on getting it to a release stage by
close of play today.
err: looks like 5.5
hi guys,
is there an estimate when centos 5.5 will be released?
I'm sitting on needles here, because since I moved my 4*1.5TB raid5
from an asus to an intel D510 mainboard I encounter bug the described
here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=512552
short version: running xfs on top
On Friday, May 14, 2010 08:50 AM, Rainer Fuegenstein wrote:
hi guys,
is there an estimate when centos 5.5 will be released?
I'm sitting on needles here, because since I moved my 4*1.5TB raid5
from an asus to an intel D510 mainboard I encounter bug the described
here:
there are a couple of srpms that are still pending out, I'll get these
done over the weekend.
did this ever make it out ??
I see there is a bug report for it
http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4042 but i dont see the
centos-release .src.rpm anywhere still?
thanks
On 04/22/2010 11:20 AM, Tom Brown wrote:
there are a couple of srpms that are still pending out, I'll get these
done over the weekend.
did this ever make it out ??
I see there is a bug report for it
http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4042 but i dont see the
centos-release .src.rpm anywhere
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On
Behalf
Of Karanbir Singh
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 12:32 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos-release srpm
Should get fixed for 5.5 :)
I've just built the rpm for centos
I've just built the rpm for centos-release 5.5 last night, and the
src.rpm is now in the same repo.
thats great but any chance of getting hold of the 5.4 .src.rpm?
Its just thats the one we need to stop us having to do nasty stuff in
the %post in relation to repos
thanks
On 04/22/2010 11:53 AM, Tom Brown wrote:
I've just built the rpm for centos-release 5.5 last night, and the
src.rpm is now in the same repo.
thats great but any chance of getting hold of the 5.4 .src.rpm?
Its just thats the one we need to stop us having to do nasty stuff in
the %post
Hi All,
Not sure exactly a memory leak or not. I was porting my nagios from
Redhat 7.3 to CentOS 5.4 and I observed the memory usage was gradually
increasing on the new centos box.
When I ran all my perl plugins with Valgrind -3.2.1, all the plugins
complained about a memory leak. Not
Greetings,
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Steve Thompson s...@vgersoft.com wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Milos Blazevic wrote:
It's going to have an accident, pretty soon, pretty
soon.
Steve
aah!... does anybody smell a BOFH here ;)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/odds/bofh/
Regards,
On 03/31/2010 09:19 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
...
Yeah.. and with a fast internet connection it takes LONGER to build up
the new rpms from the deltarpms compared to just downloading the new rpms
as full packages :)
I've noticed that too on my eee 901 with a slow flash disk.
yum remove
On 03/31/2010 11:43 PM, Milos Blazevic wrote:
...
Current RHEL life cycle is in fact 7 years.
Interesting, I remember hearing just the opposite - that they're about
to reduce the life cycle from 7 to 5 years, since allegedly no one uses
the same EL major release for more than 5 years. I
I'm not surprised at the delay for RHEL 6. Consider 2.x is still
supported this means they are supporting 4 different RHEL versions right
now. I would actually wait until at least 2.x dies..if not maybe 3.x
before spitting out another version.
On 4/1/2010 7:16 AM, Mogens Kjaer wrote:
On
Am 31.03.2010 18:47, schrieb MHR:
Since 5.5 is now out from Red Hat and most likely our amazing CentOS
team has already jumped on that, is there any word on Release 6? IIRC
it's already a year out of date (base was supposed to be Fedora 10),
so I have to wonder.
I didn't see anything jump
Afaik it's based on Fedora 12.
Recent activity on the EPEL repo mailing list [1] seems to indicate
that they plan to branch EPEL-6 packages from Fedora 12.
I guess that they are well informed, so this supports the idea that
Fedora 12 will be the basis for RHEL 6.
[1]
Mogens Kjaer wrote:
On 03/31/2010 11:43 PM, Milos Blazevic wrote:
...
Current RHEL life cycle is in fact 7 years.
Interesting, I remember hearing just the opposite - that they're about
to reduce the life cycle from 7 to 5 years, since allegedly no one uses
the same EL major release for
Mathieu Baudier a écrit :
Afaik it's based on Fedora 12.
Recent activity on the EPEL repo mailing list [1] seems to indicate
that they plan to branch EPEL-6 packages from Fedora 12.
Recently a friend of mine complained his Debian stable system was too
conservative, given the somewhat
They won't change the cycle for existing releases (they would
get into contract liability if they did).
RHEL2 is already out of support (it was end-of-lifed on May 31, 2009).
RHEL3 will go out of support Oct 31, 2010.
RHEL4 will go out of support Feb 29, 2012
RHEL5 will go out of
On 4/1/2010 10:14 AM, R-Elists wrote:
They won't change the cycle for existing releases (they would
get into contract liability if they did).
RHEL2 is already out of support (it was end-of-lifed on May 31, 2009).
RHEL3 will go out of support Oct 31, 2010.
RHEL4 will go out of support Feb
On 4/1/2010 9:11 AM, Niki Kovacs wrote:
Mathieu Baudier a écrit :
Afaik it's based on Fedora 12.
Recent activity on the EPEL repo mailing list [1] seems to indicate
that they plan to branch EPEL-6 packages from Fedora 12.
Recently a friend of mine complained his Debian stable system was
Niki Kovacs wrote:
Recently a friend of mine complained his Debian stable system was too
conservative, given the somewhat outdated software. I told him not to
mind, since Debian is bleeding edge compared to my OS of choice.
Maybe your friend needs another distro, of course everyone knows
it's
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:25 AM, nate cen...@linuxpowered.net wrote:
I *just* finished upgrading to CentOS 5.4 6 days ago.
How many people got trampled in the rush?
;^)
mhr
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
on 4-1-2010 6:42 AM Benjamin Franz spake the following:
Mogens Kjaer wrote:
On 03/31/2010 11:43 PM, Milos Blazevic wrote:
...
Current RHEL life cycle is in fact 7 years.
Interesting, I remember hearing just the opposite - that they're about
to reduce the life cycle from 7 to 5 years,
RHEL2 is already out of support (it was end-of-lifed on May
31, 2009).
RHEL3 will go out of support Oct 31, 2010.
RHEL4 will go out of support Feb 29, 2012
Since the world will end in 2012, your version 5 installs
will be just fine!!!
LOL
Scott,
hehehe, do you mean
I thought 4 was too buggy compared to 3 and held off
upgrading most machines until 5 was out. In retrospect that
still seems like it was a good move even if most of the
problems in 4 were eventually fixed in updates. But with
many years elapsing between releases, skipping a version
On 4/1/2010 12:08 PM, R-Elists wrote:
I thought 4 was too buggy compared to 3 and held off
upgrading most machines until 5 was out. In retrospect that
still seems like it was a good move even if most of the
problems in 4 were eventually fixed in updates. But with
many years elapsing
MHR wrote:
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:25 AM, nate cen...@linuxpowered.net wrote:
I *just* finished upgrading to CentOS 5.4 6 days ago.
How many people got trampled in the rush?
You might be surprised how many outages it takes to co-ordinate
such an upgrade in a medium-large environment(and
At Thu, 01 Apr 2010 12:29:26 -0500 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
On 4/1/2010 12:08 PM, R-Elists wrote:
I thought 4 was too buggy compared to 3 and held off
upgrading most machines until 5 was out. In retrospect that
still seems like it was a good move even if most of
On 4/1/2010 1:35 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
I thought 4 was too buggy compared to 3 and held off
upgrading most machines until 5 was out. In retrospect that
still seems like it was a good move even if most of the
problems in 4 were eventually fixed in updates. But with
many years elapsing
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:44 AM, nate cen...@linuxpowered.net wrote:
You might be surprised how many outages it takes to co-ordinate
such an upgrade in a medium-large environment(and nobody including
me likes to take *everything* down at once though we did have
such an outage a few weeks ago
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote:
CentOSPlus has the firewire drivers...
I asked about this a little while back, and I'm pretty sure the
firewire drivers are ok in the non-plus CentOS.
Or did I get that one wrong?
mhr
MHR wrote:
but I just don't like to do it. 30 systems? Yoik!
Out of ~300 ..
As for moving from 4 to 5, that's not a trivial thing at all - and
it's not an upgrade per se unless you have LOTS of faith in the
process. I always reinstall across releases, and that's a royal pain
(though
Since 5.5 is now out from Red Hat and most likely our amazing CentOS
team has already jumped on that, is there any word on Release 6? IIRC
it's already a year out of date (base was supposed to be Fedora 10),
so I have to wonder.
I didn't see anything jump out at me on the Red Hat site, so -
Has RedHat even released RHEL6?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
thus Paul Stuffins spake:
Has RedHat even released RHEL6?
Nope. But it's all over town that Red Hat might conduct one or more
public (!) beta tests of RHEL within the next several weeks (mind Red
Hat Summit in June).
Timo
-BEGIN PGP
thus Paul Stuffins spake:
Has RedHat even released RHEL6?
Nope. But it's all over town that Red Hat might conduct one or more
public (!) beta tests of RHEL within the next several weeks (mind Red
Hat Summit in June).
I didn't think they had, hence no CentOS6.
I have actually just been
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On
Behalf Of Paul Stuffins
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 12:49 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Release 6?
thus Paul Stuffins spake:
Has RedHat even released RHEL6?
Nope
On 3/31/2010 12:48 PM, Paul Stuffins wrote:
thus Paul Stuffins spake:
Has RedHat even released RHEL6?
Nope. But it's all over town that Red Hat might conduct one or more
public (!) beta tests of RHEL within the next several weeks (mind Red
Hat Summit in June).
I didn't think they had,
Has it become usable again?
Not sure, I don't use Fedora, I use CentOS on my servers and Linux
Mint on my desk and laptop's.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
At Wed, 31 Mar 2010 19:22:05 +0100 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
Has it become usable again?
Not sure, I don't use Fedora, I use CentOS on my servers and Linux
Mint on my desk and laptop's.
*I* gave up on Fedora Core after FC2: I installed it on a dual Pentium
Pro 200 box
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 19:22 +0100, Paul Stuffins wrote:
Has it become usable again?
Not sure, I don't use Fedora, I use CentOS on my servers and Linux
Mint on my desk and laptop's.
_
I use F12 on my laptop. I have to say it runs very well (definite
Paul Stuffins a écrit :
Has RedHat even released RHEL6?
Here's some fresh info:
http://www.serverwatch.com/news/article.php/3873916/Red-Hat-Enterprise-Linux-55-Released-RHEL-6-Coming-Soon.htm
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 02:43:38PM -0400, Tait Clarridge wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 19:22 +0100, Paul Stuffins wrote:
Has it become usable again?
Not sure, I don't use Fedora, I use CentOS on my servers and Linux
Mint on my desk and laptop's.
_
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Tait Clarridge wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 19:22 +0100, Paul Stuffins wrote:
Has it become usable again?
Not sure, I don't use Fedora, I use CentOS on my servers and Linux
Mint on my desk and laptop's.
I use F12 on my laptop. I have to say it runs very well (definite
On 3/31/2010 1:58 PM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Tait Clarridge wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 19:22 +0100, Paul Stuffins wrote:
Has it become usable again?
Not sure, I don't use Fedora, I use CentOS on my servers and Linux
Mint on my desk and laptop's.
I use F12 on my
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:58:25AM -0700, Paul Heinlein wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Tait Clarridge wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 19:22 +0100, Paul Stuffins wrote:
Has it become usable again?
Not sure, I don't use Fedora, I use CentOS on my servers and Linux
Mint on my desk and
On 3/31/2010 2:19 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:58:25AM -0700, Paul Heinlein wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Tait Clarridge wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 19:22 +0100, Paul Stuffins wrote:
Has it become usable again?
Not sure, I don't use Fedora, I use CentOS on my servers
A lot of the work after Fedora 6 seemed to revolve around making
single-user desktop type access more convenient at the expense of more
general purpose server concepts - and making it boot quickly which isn't
a big priority on boxes that run all the time. And some things even
when not
Since 5.5 is now out from Red Hat and most likely our amazing CentOS
team has already jumped on that, is there any word on Release 6? IIRC
it's already a year out of date (base was supposed to be Fedora 10),
so I have to wonder.
I vaguely recollect that RH mentioned pushing out the (total)
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
We use F12 headless, so I can't comment on desktop issues, but I
really like the deltarpm stuff. It really cuts down on bandwidth
requirements on a frequently updated distro like Fedora.
Yeah.. and with a fast internet connection it takes LONGER to
Spiro Harvey wrote:
Since 5.5 is now out from Red Hat and most likely our amazing CentOS
team has already jumped on that, is there any word on Release 6? IIRC
it's already a year out of date (base was supposed to be Fedora 10),
so I have to wonder.
I vaguely recollect that RH
101 - 200 of 247 matches
Mail list logo
