[BozemanLUG] Lifecycle of Scientific Linux

[David Eder]

I think I misunderstood the issue our sysadmin was talking about to some
extent.

I think the problem was that we would sit on a version and keep installing
it until it died.  Then we would move to the next version.  But as it was
just a couple of years newer, it would only have a couple of years left
until it would die.

I think what he was looking for was a much larger gap from one version to
another or even a rolling release.

I compared charts and it looks like both CentOS and Scientific Linux are
on the same schedule as RHEL.  And with 5 and 6 the lifetime has been
extended from 5 to 10 years.

10 years seems pretty good to me, but then again we have some ancient
servers that are approaching that age running FreeBSD 4.

If only we could get rolling releases with a solid distro from RH.

David.

> Greetings,
>
> I just saw an email on one of the Scientific Linux mailing lists stating
> the support lifecycles for their RHEL clone.  They appear to adopt RHEL's
> cycle.  There was a some question about this a few meetings back so I
> thought I'd share it with this list:
>
> http://www.scientificlinux.org/distributions/
>
> TYL,
> --
> Scott Dowdle
> 704 Church Street
> Belgrade, MT 59714
> (406)388-0827 [home]
> (406)994-3931 [work]
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at bozemanlug.org
> http://lists.bozemanlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>