Scientific Linux Forum.org



  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> CentOS updates much more faster than SL?
synflag
 Posted: Nov 4 2012, 08:32 AM
Quote Post


SLF Rookie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 1281
Joined: 11-February 12









The day 1 of november, on my CentOS 6.3 server, i received an update of glibc.
The version is: glibc-2.12-1.80.el6_3.6.x86_64, according with the changelog:

* Mon Oct 8 14:00:00 2012 Patsy Franklin <3spfranklilaw@redhat.com> - 2.12-1.80.el6_3.6
- Don't free memory allocated by mempool allocator. (#864046)

The bug, red hat link: http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-1422.html.

If compare... both, RHEL and CentOS are published the same update the same day with a hours of difference.

CentOS Base Repo: glibc-2.12-1.80.el6_3.6.x86_64.rpm 01-Nov-2012 12:23

Day 4 of Nov, no updates on SL, sl, sl fast bugs, testing or rolling, so, is the SL team a bit lazy or SL is in a bad moment?.

PD: No is a security fix, only bugfix, but, is glibc, and is a bug relatively relevant.

What do you think?

--------------------
AMD Phenom x4 945 3.0Ghz - 8Gb Ram DDR3-1600 GSKILL RIPJAWS - 2 HDD 500GB WD SATAII - Thermaltake Toughpower 700 - Thermaltake V9 Black - LG LED 19" // Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (for games only), Fedora 16 x86_64
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lenovo Thinkpad T400 Intel P8600 - 500GB SATAII - 4GB DDR3-1066 // SL6.2, Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (games and security test)
PMUsers Website
^
zxq9
 Posted: Nov 4 2012, 08:37 AM
Quote Post


SLF Geek
****

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Member No.: 611
Joined: 5-August 11









You should probably uninstall SL, flee to CentOS immediately and start a bunch of CentOS VS SL VS WhiteBox threads on the CentOS forums. Everyone over there is burning to discuss this with you.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
^
Nathan
 Posted: Nov 4 2012, 10:36 AM
Quote Post


SLF Geek
****

Group: Members
Posts: 243
Member No.: 928
Joined: 15-October 11









QUOTE (zxq9 @ Nov 4 2012, 09:37 AM)
You should probably uninstall SL, flee to CentOS immediately and start a bunch of CentOS VS SL VS WhiteBox threads on the CentOS forums. Everyone over there is burning to discuss this with you.

http://th166.photobucket.com/albums/u117/rdshear/Smiley%20Faces/th_smiley-face-thumbs-up.gif
PM
^
synflag
 Posted: Nov 4 2012, 07:17 PM
Quote Post


SLF Rookie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 1281
Joined: 11-February 12









QUOTE (zxq9 @ Nov 4 2012, 05:37 AM)
You should probably uninstall SL, flee to CentOS immediately and start a bunch of CentOS VS SL VS WhiteBox threads on the CentOS forums. Everyone over there is burning to discuss this with you.


I'm asking what is your opinion about this, on server enviroment.
No creating a flame about CentOS vs SL vs X vs X1.. etc. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2835777/BangHead1.gif

So, my question is: SL team is a bit kind of lazy or demorated by some motive? dry.gif

Thanks biggrin.gif

--------------------
AMD Phenom x4 945 3.0Ghz - 8Gb Ram DDR3-1600 GSKILL RIPJAWS - 2 HDD 500GB WD SATAII - Thermaltake Toughpower 700 - Thermaltake V9 Black - LG LED 19" // Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (for games only), Fedora 16 x86_64
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lenovo Thinkpad T400 Intel P8600 - 500GB SATAII - 4GB DDR3-1066 // SL6.2, Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (games and security test)
PMUsers Website
^
synflag
 Posted: Nov 4 2012, 07:37 PM
Quote Post


SLF Rookie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 1281
Joined: 11-February 12









In a previous post, similar: http://scientificlinuxforum.org/index.php?showtopic=1963

I asked about gnome-desktop, and, Nathan say "The 'once a week'-approach seems very reasonable to me".

So, in this case, is not a fast track about desktop, glibc is about all, in a server is relevant.

Is SL team demorated by some motive?

--------------------
AMD Phenom x4 945 3.0Ghz - 8Gb Ram DDR3-1600 GSKILL RIPJAWS - 2 HDD 500GB WD SATAII - Thermaltake Toughpower 700 - Thermaltake V9 Black - LG LED 19" // Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (for games only), Fedora 16 x86_64
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lenovo Thinkpad T400 Intel P8600 - 500GB SATAII - 4GB DDR3-1066 // SL6.2, Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (games and security test)
PMUsers Website
^
tux99
 Posted: Nov 4 2012, 07:37 PM
Quote Post


SLF Moderator
********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 1273
Member No.: 224
Joined: 28-May 11









QUOTE (synflag @ Nov 4 2012, 09:17 PM)

So, my question is: SL team is a bit kind of lazy or demorated by some motive?  dry.gif


That a very loaded question, which is in direct contrast to your statement that you don't want to create a flame war.

It has been said previously in other threads on this forum about this subject, that SL gives bugfixes (which you don't get by default anyway as they go in the separate 'fastbugs' repo, which is disabled by default!) a lower priority and only deals with them once a week or so.

If that's not fast enough for you then switch to Centos, it's your choice, nobody is forcing you to use SL.

--------------------
My personal SL6 repository, specialized in audio/video software: http://pkgrepo.linuxtech.net/el6/
(can be used together with EPEL and ELRepo repositories) - repository mirror: http://linuxsoft.cern.ch/linuxtech/el6/
PM
^
synflag
 Posted: Nov 4 2012, 07:47 PM
Quote Post


SLF Rookie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 1281
Joined: 11-February 12










--------------------
AMD Phenom x4 945 3.0Ghz - 8Gb Ram DDR3-1600 GSKILL RIPJAWS - 2 HDD 500GB WD SATAII - Thermaltake Toughpower 700 - Thermaltake V9 Black - LG LED 19" // Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (for games only), Fedora 16 x86_64
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lenovo Thinkpad T400 Intel P8600 - 500GB SATAII - 4GB DDR3-1066 // SL6.2, Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (games and security test)
PMUsers Website
^
synflag
 Posted: Nov 4 2012, 07:50 PM
Quote Post


SLF Rookie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 1281
Joined: 11-February 12









QUOTE (tux99 @ Nov 4 2012, 04:37 PM)
QUOTE (synflag @ Nov 4 2012, 09:17 PM)

So, my question is: SL team is a bit kind of lazy or demorated by some motive?  dry.gif


That a very loaded question, which is in direct contrast to your statement that you don't want to create a flame war.

It has been said previously in other threads on this forum about this subject, that SL gives bugfixes (which you don't get by default anyway as they go in the separate 'fastbugs' repo, which is disabled by default!) a lower priority and only deals with them once a week or so.

If that's not fast enough for you then switch to Centos, it's your choice, nobody is forcing you to use SL.


No, no flame war, in absolute. I'm no interested in X vs Y, only on the best for my dedicated server and VPS's running on the host using KVM.
I'm not a SL or CentOS fanboy, only want the best result for my work. http://th166.photobucket.com/albums/u117/rdshear/Smiley%20Faces/th_smiley-face-thumbs-up.gif

And, yes, i know about bug fix and sl-fastbugs, but, i'm saying that glibc bug mentioned is a bug fix?, yes, but is a non-desktop component, is a core bug, and is not in sl-fastbugs yet, why?, is for that my question tux99

--------------------
AMD Phenom x4 945 3.0Ghz - 8Gb Ram DDR3-1600 GSKILL RIPJAWS - 2 HDD 500GB WD SATAII - Thermaltake Toughpower 700 - Thermaltake V9 Black - LG LED 19" // Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (for games only), Fedora 16 x86_64
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lenovo Thinkpad T400 Intel P8600 - 500GB SATAII - 4GB DDR3-1066 // SL6.2, Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (games and security test)
PMUsers Website
^
Nathan
 Posted: Nov 4 2012, 09:05 PM
Quote Post


SLF Geek
****

Group: Members
Posts: 243
Member No.: 928
Joined: 15-October 11









Well, maybe they haven't had the time to update it? I'm pretty sure the people working on Scientific Linux are also supposed to do other scientific stuff.

Honestly, you've made two threads whining (yes) about SL updates being a tad slower than those of CentOS. Just switch to CentOS already, you won't ever need to complain anymore!
PM
^
redman
 Posted: Nov 5 2012, 11:56 AM
Quote Post


Retired SLF Administrator
********

Group: Admins
Posts: 1276
Member No.: 2
Joined: 8-April 11









The discussion on "which one is better: SL or CentOS" is an old one.
It shows up now and then, especially when Red Hat releases a new version of RHEL: "who will be first".

SL is a RHEL clone, nothing more nothing less.
CentOS is one too but with different goals.

For everyone who wants to know which one to use I have one thing to say:
"Feel free to try both of them and pick the one YOU like best. Both are great and both are clones of RHEL".

--------------------
"Sometimes the best helping hand you can give is a good, firm push."
PM
^
synflag
 Posted: Nov 6 2012, 08:13 AM
Quote Post


SLF Rookie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 1281
Joined: 11-February 12









QUOTE (redman @ Nov 5 2012, 08:56 AM)
The discussion on "which one is better: SL or CentOS" is an old one.
It shows up now and then, especially when Red Hat releases a new version of RHEL: "who will be first".

SL is a RHEL clone, nothing more nothing less.
CentOS is one too but with different goals.

For everyone who wants to know which one to use I have one thing to say:
"Feel free to try both of them and pick the one YOU like best. Both are great and both are clones of RHEL".


Which are the different goals of CentOS and SL?

redman: you read about the changelog send it by private message?, you can explain it me, because I do not understand sad.gif

How SL have a version package released 2012-11-5 for red hat, before, when SL6.3 was released?, and the changelog mention a BZ present on changelog of kernel.org 2.21.1 linux kernel, while, CentOS released the same package the same day of RHEL 2012-11-5 with the correct changelog info.

A yum plugin changelog bug?. I don't understand, SL have a separated bugzilla team from red hat and fix some packages before than rhel?

--------------------
AMD Phenom x4 945 3.0Ghz - 8Gb Ram DDR3-1600 GSKILL RIPJAWS - 2 HDD 500GB WD SATAII - Thermaltake Toughpower 700 - Thermaltake V9 Black - LG LED 19" // Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (for games only), Fedora 16 x86_64
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lenovo Thinkpad T400 Intel P8600 - 500GB SATAII - 4GB DDR3-1066 // SL6.2, Windows 7 Ultimate x86_64 (games and security test)
PMUsers Website
^
redman
 Posted: Nov 6 2012, 11:35 AM
Quote Post


Retired SLF Administrator
********

Group: Admins
Posts: 1276
Member No.: 2
Joined: 8-April 11









You mean this:

QUOTE
2012-11-05 red hat published a bug fix https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-1427.html
The same day, CentOS publish the same bug fix and the changelog say the same of redhat.

Now, SL 6.3, have the same version of package until 6.3 was released, but, the changelog using yum changelog 1 util-linux-ng (i686 in my laptop), speak about a bug related with fdisk, if i want the bug, is on the changelog of linux kernel vanilla 2.21.1  wacko.gif


My laptop:

util-linux-ng-2.17.2-12.7.el6.i686      installed
* Fri Apr  6 09:00:00 2012 Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com> 2.17.2-12.7
- fix #740163 - 'fdisk -l' returns confusing output (sfdisk)


Kernel.org: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/util-linux/v2.21/v2.21.1-ChangeLog

"commit 5287a42f773a135a10756975d0d2f315f6ff1172
Author: Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>
Date:  Tue Mar 20 11:13:28 2012 +0100

    fdisk: don't print confusing warning on non-partitioned disks
   
    Addresses: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740163
    Signed-off-by: Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>"

--------------------
"Sometimes the best helping hand you can give is a good, firm push."
PM
^
redman
 Posted: Nov 6 2012, 11:41 AM
Quote Post


Retired SLF Administrator
********

Group: Admins
Posts: 1276
Member No.: 2
Joined: 8-April 11









Any question related to the developers team of SL and why do or do not release bugfixes released by Red Hat should be asked on the Scientific Linux mailinglists. This is not because we here at SLF do not want to answer them, but simply because we do not know. SLF is an online community of people who like and/or use Scientific Linux. None of us here is part of the SL developers.

We can discuss what to use (RHEL, SL or CentOS) but we have no idea what the SL developers will (not) do.
If you want to know for sure, you would have to ask your questions on their mailinglist.

--------------------
"Sometimes the best helping hand you can give is a good, firm push."
PM
^
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll