On Tue, 24 Apr 2012, g wrote:
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--enigF04C7BC08F8040F79BD8DF61
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 04/24/2012 03:53 PM, zxq9 wrote:
<>
I take that to mean that SL is s
On 04/24/2012 03:53 PM, zxq9 wrote:
<>
> I take that to mean that SL is similarly extended, then. I suppose the
> project page just hasn't been updated to reflect this.
-=-
i tend to presume as such.
> Thanks for finding that.
-=-
welcome.
--
peace out.
tc.hago,
g
.
*please reply "plain t
On 04/24/2012 11:01 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:53 AM, zxq9 wrote:
On 04/24/2012 11:58 PM, g wrote:
On 04/24/2012 11:02 AM, zxq9 wrote:
From a question on the Japanese mailing list:
TUV is committing to a 10 year production lifecycle for 5 and 6. CentOS
has now refl
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:53 AM, zxq9 wrote:
> On 04/24/2012 11:58 PM, g wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/24/2012 11:02 AM, zxq9 wrote:
>>>
>>> From a question on the Japanese mailing list:
>>>
>>> TUV is committing to a 10 year production lifecycle for 5 and 6. CentOS
>>> has now reflected this on their p
On 04/24/2012 11:58 PM, g wrote:
On 04/24/2012 11:02 AM, zxq9 wrote:
From a question on the Japanese mailing list:
TUV is committing to a 10 year production lifecycle for 5 and 6. CentOS
has now reflected this on their project's lifecycle page. Scientific
Linux does not match this.
in a p
On 04/24/2012 11:02 AM, zxq9 wrote:
> From a question on the Japanese mailing list:
>
> TUV is committing to a 10 year production lifecycle for 5 and 6. CentOS
> has now reflected this on their project's lifecycle page. Scientific
> Linux does not match this.
in a previous post from Connie Si
