CentOS - Mar 2006 - Mirror Mirror on the wall, who is the slowest of them all? CentOS

Some of the other RHEL rebuilds take one or two days, while CentOS
takes
2 weeks. While i can't say if they have more than a hundred users,
their 
speed in releasing quarterly updates is commendable.

Technically CentOS is not the slowest, as Whitebox takes the wooden
spoon but you get the general idea. :)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 05:45 -0800, Jim Smith wrote:
> Some of the other RHEL rebuilds take one or two days, while CentOS
> takes
> 2 weeks. While i can't say if they have more than a hundred users,
> their 
> speed in releasing quarterly updates is commendable.
> 
> Technically CentOS is not the slowest, as Whitebox takes the wooden
> spoon but you get the general idea. :)
> 
Mr. Smith,

1.  If you can show me a FREE rebuild project that has released update 3
respun ISOs ... I would like to see it.

2.  Maybe you should either start your own rebuild project ... or use
one of these other, much superior products.

3.  We don't just rebuild the SRPMS ... we rebuild them ... install and
test them ... QA them ... fix issues with them if it doesn't work ...
respin it again ... provide support for 3 arches that the upstream
provider doesn't even support ... 

But I digress ... back to making a quality distro
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060318/c1a99a2a/attachment.sig>

On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 05:45 -0800, Jim Smith wrote:
> Some of the other RHEL rebuilds take one or two days, while CentOS
> takes
> 2 weeks. While i can't say if they have more than a hundred users,
> their 
> speed in releasing quarterly updates is commendable.
> 
> Technically CentOS is not the slowest, as Whitebox takes the wooden
> spoon but you get the general idea. :)
----
is it possible that you don't consider how offensive that comments like
this and your insensitive and ill-informed comments last week about the
various repos are?

You just earned the ticket to /dev/null on my sieve scripts

Craig

> Some of the other RHEL rebuilds take one or two days, while CentOS takes 
> 2 weeks. While i can't say if they have more than a hundred users,
their
> speed in releasing quarterly updates is commendable.
>
> Technically CentOS is not the slowest, as Whitebox takes the wooden
> spoon but you get the general idea. :)
Have you thought about roasting in hell for a bit lately?
If not, you really should, it's an enlightening experience.

Cheers.

Maybe there should be a fund raiser for updates - if you want them faster, you 
donate more money.

How much would you be willing to donate to get updates sooner?

On Saturday 18 March 2006 8:45 am, Jim Smith wrote:
> Some of the other RHEL rebuilds take one or two days, while CentOS
> takes
> 2 weeks. While i can't say if they have more than a hundred users,
> their
> speed in releasing quarterly updates is commendable.
>
> Technically CentOS is not the slowest, as Whitebox takes the wooden
> spoon but you get the general idea. :)

> Technically CentOS is not the slowest, as Whitebox takes the wooden
> spoon but you get the general idea. :)
I feel that the CentOS team does an outstanding job.  I have never used 
any other RHEL rebuilds, because CentOS is the clear leader in RHEL 
rebuilds.  Nothing is more important than quality, and no one does it 
better than CentOS.  In many ways, CentOS has a harder job than Red Hat 
does.  Regardless of how the CentOS engineers might choose to solve a 
problem, they are committed to following in Red Hat's footsteps, no matter 
how difficult it is.  CentOS also adds value on top of RHEL by providing 
the centosplus software, and by supporting architectures that RHEL 
doesn't.  I'm certain that rebuilding SRPMS on architectures that were 
never considered in the original packages takes a great deal of skill, 
expense, time, and effort.  You may have also noticed that CentOS placed 
2nd out of all other distributions for Linux distribution of the year in 
Linux Journal Magazine.  I also find it remarkable that CentOS provides 
rebuilds of RHEL 2.1, 3, and 4.

It is unfortunate that you are not satisfied by the tremendous efforts of 
the CentOS team.

I feel that the CentOS team does a remarkable job.  I use CentOS on 
many servers and workstations to perform a wide variety of tasks.  I have 
never once been disappointed.


Barry Brimer, RHCE

On Saturday 18 March 2006 08:45, Jim Smith wrote:
> Some of the other RHEL rebuilds take one or two days, while CentOS
> takes
> 2 weeks. While i can't say if they have more than a hundred users,
> their
> speed in releasing quarterly updates is commendable.
Mr. Smith, this is quite offensive.  Each project has its own philosophy on 
releases; the CentOS philosophy is to release after the internal team has 
done thorough QA on the code.

Another RHEL rebuild is Scientific Linux; they have released beta ISO's as
of
yesterday afternoon; however, my experience with SL is that this is likely 
the first of three or four beta ISO releases before the final quarterly 
update release, which typically takes (wait for it)..... two weeks, if not 
more.  They just have made the process more visible.

However, spinning ISOs takes resources; Connie Sieh has the resources of 
FermiLabs to do this, and uses them well, and is doing a great job.  This is 
one reason I'd love to see CentOS and SL do more together; the combination
of
resources would be wonderful.  Of course, there are a few differences in the 
distributions, and some of those might be showstoppers.

I'm sure the SL team wouldn't mind you helping beta test their
ISO's.
-- 
Lamar Owen
Director of Information Technology
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
(828)862-5554
www.pari.edu

Tell us again WHY you use CentOS.  Why not one that gives you updates at your
speed???
> 
> From: Jim Smith <jim_smith2006 at yahoo.com>
> Date: 2006/03/18 Sat AM 11:26:44 EST
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Mirror Mirror on the wall,
> 	who is the slowest of them all?  CentOS
> 
> --- Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com> wrote:
> 
> > Name one distro ... other than Lineox ... that has respun CDs for
> > EL4
> > update3 out right now.
> > 
> 
> Piebox released theirs on March 10th. See distrowatch weekly or
> http://www.piebox.com/news.php#2006-03-10 
> 
> Some of you are taking this way too personally, take the truth one
> pinch at a time.
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 05:45 -0800, Jim Smith wrote:
> Some of the other RHEL rebuilds take one or two days, while CentOS
> takes
> 2 weeks. While i can't say if they have more than a hundred users,
> their 
> speed in releasing quarterly updates is commendable.
> 
> Technically CentOS is not the slowest, as Whitebox takes the wooden
> spoon but you get the general idea. :)
hummm, I can't believe I am really reading this. Rather than think that
Johnny Hughes and others are making a ton of money (which would warranty
such statements or subject matter); I think they spend much more than a
hap-hazzard amount of time providing this quality distro! I dunno,
statements like these just tell me you are either bored or for some
reason expect much much more for the grand cost of not a single cent.
whew! If you are not happy maybe you should move on to another freebie
or even spring big money for something that better suit your needs.
please don't burn our eyes with this kind of subject matter that I
suspect that goes against many others grain besides mine. The crew
providing this for us are doing one hell of a job and I think
commendation should be in line rather than this kind of thought.

John Rose

Very well said and I second this 100000000%.

Chris 
 
>>> peter@farrows.org 03/19/06 2:04 pm >>> 
Dear All,

Centos works for me, it is indeed a godsend.  I know how much effort it 
takes to create such a distribution and test it.
I am grateful for all the hard effort it takes.

Lets not keep the Centos team tied up with threads like this that really 
do little more that use bandwidth and storage space in the long run for 
no real benefit.

Those people who make good use of Centos know had solid it is, nothing 
more needs to be said, if anyone disagrees, they should vote with their 
feet and go somewhere else, but don''t bother flaming people here, 
because it neither necessary nor wanted, nor justified.

Anybody who has the audacity to criticise people who do stuff to their 
very best for free for the benefit of others really, does need grow up 
and have a reality check.

Lets end it here boys and girls, if you don''t like Centos then stop 
wasting the time of those of us who do, and push off now.

regards

Pete

Scott Silva wrote:
> Jim Smith spake the following on 3/18/2006 7:40 AM:
>   
>> ---  Craig White <craigwhite@azapple.com> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> is it possible that you don''t consider how offensive that
comments
>>> like
>>> this and your insensitive and ill- informed comments last week
about
>>> the
>>> various repos are?
>>>
>>> You just earned the ticket to /dev/null on my sieve scripts
>>>
>>> Craig
>>>       
>> Are you the same Craig who claims to have no experience at all of kde
>> somewhere on the net and elsewhere you praise the kde- redhat repo?
>> Shambolic?
>>
>> As the the rest of you cowboys, tell me other than WhiteBox who is
>> the slowest to release updates.
>>
>> Don''t take this personally, but a cold reality check will
enable you
>> to understand the reality of the situation. 
>>
>> Don''t get me wrong, CentOS is (for the most part) doing a
superb job.
>> You can guess what needs to be improved upon.
>>
>> Johnny and the team need reality comments rather than ass- kissing
>> lamers.
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
>> http://mail.yahoo.com 
>>     
> Anyone calling CentOS slow hasn''t used Debian! But why sit here
and bash
> someone for their unpaid volunteer work! It isn''t like they are
getting six
> figure salaries to make people happy. If you want fast, go get the source
rpms
> and rebuild them, and don''t come back here asking for help from
these
> overworked and under respected volunteers!
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>   
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

--  
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.