My laptop is a Thinkpad T20 running CentOS 5.1 The reason it is running CentOS at all is because Fedora Core 6 was workable on it, but Fedora 8 was a complete dog. Anyway - with all the new desktop stuff in CentOS 5.2 I'm wondering if I would be happier just leaving it at 5.1 rather than letting it update to 5.2. Will 5.1 continue to get security fixes if I leave it at 5.1 or do I need to update to 5.2 to get the patches? I'm planning to replace it at some point, just haven't seen T40s on eBay drop to my price range yet.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Michael A. Peters <mpeters at mac.com> wrote:> My laptop is a Thinkpad T20 running CentOS 5.1 > The reason it is running CentOS at all is because Fedora Core 6 was > workable on it, but Fedora 8 was a complete dog. > Anyway - with all the new desktop stuff in CentOS 5.2 I'm wondering if I > would be happier just leaving it at 5.1 rather than letting it update to > 5.2. > Will 5.1 continue to get security fixes if I leave it at 5.1 or do I need > to update to 5.2 to get the patches? > I'm planning to replace it at some point, just haven't seen T40s on eBay > drop to my price range yet.I upgraded my Desktop yesterday and my daughter's Desktop this morning. If you surf the web, the move from Mozilla Firefox 1.5.x to Mozilla Firefox 3.0 Beta 5 will be well worth your time. I was having problems, on web sites I frequently visit, with Firefox 1.5. CentOS 5 is based on Fedora Core 6 as I recall. The difference is with CentOS you get a LONG life, more stability and more security, along with super support from this mailing list. I believe that Firefox 3.0 requires a bunch of other stuff that is not in CentOS 5.1, to run. It took me just over an hour to download all the packages for each box and about another hour to get it all installed. I would suggest that: (a) You backup the data on your laptop (b) login as root and do "yum upgrade" and move to CentOS 5.2. If you do not upgrade everything, you will still get security updates, for the packages you do want to update. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080625/ed02be05/attachment-0001.html>
Lanny Marcus wrote:> > > I upgraded my Desktop yesterday and my daughter's Desktop this morning. > If you surf the web, the move from Mozilla Firefox 1.5.x to Mozilla > Firefox 3.0 Beta 5 will be well worth your time. I was having problems, > on web sites I frequently visit, with Firefox 1.5. CentOS 5 is based on > Fedora Core 6 as I recall. The difference is with CentOS you get a LONG > life, more stability and more security, along with super support from > this mailing list. I believe that Firefox 3.0 requires a bunch of other > stuff that is not in CentOS 5.1, to run. It took me just over an hour to > download all the packages for each box and about another hour to get it > all installed. I would suggest that: (a) You backup the data on your > laptop (b) login as root and do "yum upgrade" and move to CentOS 5.2. > If you do not upgrade everything, you will still get security updates, > for the packages you do want to update.I'm already running FF2 on the laptop. The issue is the laptop has a 700MHz CPU (550 MHz on battery) and 384MB of ram, and unfortunately it seems that many of the new gnome libraries aren't very conservative when it comes to ram and CPU, causing gnome to be a dog. My only gripe with FF2 is that it has a tendency to sometimes crash when opening a dialog window, but I'd rather have that happen then a desktop that just isn't usable because of code bloat on older hardware. My desktop is a 2.2GHz AMD X2 w/ 2GB of RAM - upgrading that to 5.2 is a no brainer. My LAN server is an older machine, but it's headless so I don't forsee an upgrade problem causing performance there either. It's the laptop w/ desktop performance that I'm worried about, and I'd rather not play around with minimal UIs that aren't well supported. It's the desktop performance of 5.2 that I really want to know about. If I have to upgrade to get security patches I have to upgrade, but as long as 5.1 still gets security patches, then I really may consider not doing it.
on 6-25-2008 12:02 PM Michael A. Peters spake the following:> My laptop is a Thinkpad T20 running CentOS 5.1 > > The reason it is running CentOS at all is because Fedora Core 6 was > workable on it, but Fedora 8 was a complete dog. > > Anyway - with all the new desktop stuff in CentOS 5.2 I'm wondering if I > would be happier just leaving it at 5.1 rather than letting it update to > 5.2. > > Will 5.1 continue to get security fixes if I leave it at 5.1 or do I > need to update to 5.2 to get the patches? > > I'm planning to replace it at some point, just haven't seen T40s on eBay > drop to my price range yet.5.1 is not a different distro than 5.2. If you update 5.1 it becomes 5.2. You don't go out and say "update to 5.2", you just yum update, and it becomes 5.2. Think of it in Windows terms as Centos 5 sp1 (service pack 1) or Centos 5 sp2. If you want to stay with 5.1 you no longer get updates. Upstream has a setup for staying with a point release, but I don't think it has trickled down to CentOS yet. -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't!!!! -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 258 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080625/7a7348d4/attachment-0001.sig>
Lanny Marcus wrote: <snip>> I upgraded my Desktop yesterday and my daughter's Desktop this > morning. If you surf the web, the move from Mozilla Firefox 1.5.x to > Mozilla Firefox 3.0 Beta 5 will be well worth your time.FF 3b is not without its own warts, though. I frequently save downloaded video clips to be saved on CD or DVD for friends who don't have broadband access. I have been doing this very cleanly in FF 1.5 using an extension named Download Helper -- which doesn't work in Firefox 3. It turns out that there is an update for Download Helper but I can't say whether of not that works because Firefox 3 can't find the flash player -- which is definitely installed 'cause I'm listening to the audio from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzAXb7qCCAo right now. (Foster Brooks "Drunk Airline Pilot" routine) Hopefully, a "compound w" for Firefox will be forthcoming.
> 5.1 is not a different distro than 5.2. If you update 5.1 it becomes > 5.2. You don't go out and say "update to 5.2", you just yum update, and > it becomes 5.2. > Think of it in Windows terms as Centos 5 sp1 (service pack 1) or Centos > 5 sp2. > If you want to stay with 5.1 you no longer get updates.are you speaking as an official representative of CentOS? -- Spiro Harvey Knossos Networks Ltd 021-295-1923 www.knossos.net.nz
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Michael A. Peters <mpeters at mac.com> wrote:> My laptop is a Thinkpad T20 running CentOS 5.1 > > The reason it is running CentOS at all is because Fedora Core 6 was > workable on it, but Fedora 8 was a complete dog. > > Anyway - with all the new desktop stuff in CentOS 5.2 I'm wondering if I > would be happier just leaving it at 5.1 rather than letting it update to > 5.2. > > Will 5.1 continue to get security fixes if I leave it at 5.1 or do I need > to update to 5.2 to get the patches? > > I'm planning to replace it at some point, just haven't seen T40s on eBay > drop to my price range yet.My daughter's Desktop has 384 MB of RAM. I did "yum upgrade" on it this morning, without any issues. That box has a P4 1.6 GHz CPU, which is more power than your laptop has. Probably your laptop would be OK on CentOS 5.2 but I cannot guarantee that. You will have to decide whether or not to upgrade from 5.1 to 5.2. Backup first! If you want to stay with CentOS 5.1, don't do any updates or upgrades. The Distribution is CentOS 5. CentOS 5.1 and 5.2 have the latest updates, as of a certain date, at Upstream. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080625/3970a279/attachment-0001.html>