I was in the #centos-social channel and simply stated that I noticed CentOS 3-4 were getting a lot of updates. I also stated that the CentOS 5 was one kernel behind, as in RHEL it is at -53, the gentlemen then told me that I was wrong and it was at -21. I then asked if there was a way to get a progress report somehow on 5.2, and that 5.2 has already upgraded that kernel. The result was that I was banned for being correct. I dont understand this kind of support. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080605/9551f172/attachment-0002.html>
James Bunnell wrote:> I was in the #centos-social channel and simply stated that I noticed > CentOS 3-4 were getting a lot of updates. I also stated that the CentOS > 5 was one kernel behind, as in RHEL it is at -53, the gentlemen then > told me that I was wrong and it was at -21. I then asked if there was a > way to get a progress report somehow on 5.2, and that 5.2 has already > upgraded that kernel. The result was that I was banned for being > correct. I dont understand this kind of support.Progress report on 5.2 : it will be ready in a few days, expect release in a few weeks. -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219 at icq
James Bunnell wrote:> I was in the #centos-social channel and simply stated that I noticed > CentOS 3-4 were getting a lot of updates. I also stated that the CentOS > 5 was one kernel behind, as in RHEL it is at -53, the gentlemen then > told me that I was wrong and it was at -21. I then asked if there was a > way to get a progress report somehow on 5.2, and that 5.2 has already > upgraded that kernel. The result was that I was banned for being > correct. I dont understand this kind of support.You are NOT correct ... The latest NON 5.2 kernel is: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Client/en/os/SRPMS/kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.src.rpm The latest 5.2 kernel is: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Client/en/os/SRPMS/kernel-2.6.18-92.1.1.el5.src.rpm As far as being banned on an IRC Channel ... I am sure you were warned first. CentOS is manned by volunteers. If you want to argue with the people who are on IRC after they tell you not to, then you will be banned. The CentOS project trusts the judgment of our forum moderators and our IRC ops ... if they ban you then you are banned. We are not a for profit company where you pay us for service and can be disrespectful to our employees. You will instead have to be polite in your disagreements. If this is a problem, I suggest that you find a paid for service contract where you can be rude to the people with whom you interact. Thanks, Johnny Hughes -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 252 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080605/2046cf0f/attachment-0002.sig>
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 10:35 AM, James Bunnell <jbunnell at belencomputers.com> wrote:> I was in the #centos-social channel and simply stated that I noticed CentOS > 3-4 were getting a lot of updates. I also stated that the CentOS 5 was one > kernel behind, as in RHEL it is at -53, the gentlemen then told me that I > was wrong and it was at -21. I then asked if there was a way to get a > progress report somehow on 5.2, and that 5.2 has already upgraded that > kernel. The result was that I was banned for being correct. I dont > understand this kind of support.Actually no. I banned you for 15 minutes because you were being profane, pedantic about verbiage. The user trying to help you had already complained about typos and such, and was using kernel shorthand since the -53.1. is common to the more recent kernels being discussed at the time. I warned you twice to stop being quite so pedantic, kicked you twice (since you were unwilling to take the hint the first time) and finally resorted to the ban when you began to spew insults and profanity. If you want support from folks who will take verbal abuse, buy a RHEL license. Otherwise, play by the channel rules and be nice to others (yes, for those of you who know me, I *can* say that with a straight face most of the time). Crying about an irc ban on the mailing list is simply a way to have the last word. If you want it, it's yours. The ban was temporary to allow all parties time to cool down, and I'm done with the entire issue. Hopefully you are as well. -- During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell
James Bunnell wrote:> I was in the #centos-social channel and simply stated that I noticed > CentOS 3-4 were getting a lot of updates. I also stated that the CentOS > 5 was one kernel behind, as in RHEL it is at -53, the gentlemen then > told me that I was wrong and it was at -21.lftp ftp.redhat.com:/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/SRPMS> ls kernel* > kernel.list lftp ftp.redhat.com:/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/SRPMS> exit [angenenr at shutdown ~]$grep 53 kernel.list -rw-rw-r-- 2 ftp ftp 54464006 Feb 12 14:37 kernel-2.6.18-53.1.13.el5.src.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 2 ftp ftp 54492476 Mar 03 09:40 kernel-2.6.18-53.1.14.el5.src.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 2 ftp ftp 54521781 May 04 07:52 kernel-2.6.18-53.1.19.el5.src.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 2 ftp ftp 54540423 May 19 09:58 kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.src.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 2 ftp ftp 54421174 Nov 28 2007 kernel-2.6.18-53.1.4.el5.src.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 2 ftp ftp 54461630 Jan 18 11:29 kernel-2.6.18-53.1.6.el5.src.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 ftp ftp 54386174 Oct 11 2007 kernel-2.6.18-53.el5.src.rpm [angenenr at shutdown ~]$ So which kernel would that -53 be? The one from October 11th, 2007?> I then asked if there was a way to get a progress report somehow on > 5.2, and that 5.2 has already upgraded that kernel. The result was > that I was banned for being correct.a) #centos-social is not a support channel, as that channel's topic clearly states. b) The ban was *not* for you being correct (because you are not, 5.2 will have 2.6.18-92, but for your behaviour over the last days/weeks and your *constantly* asking about progress on 5.2 (and getting the answer everybody getsdoes, see http://planet.centos.org/).> I dont understand this kind of support.I don't understand why you came here to whine about that. Ralph -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080605/31537f39/attachment-0002.sig>