similar to: [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64

On Thu, April 2, 2015 15:25, Jim Perrin wrote: > > > On 04/02/2015 01:28 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > >> >> Soliciting our feedback *before* changing everything regarding >> release names would have been nice. > > We did. > > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2015-February/012873.html > > You mean this? On: Sun Feb 22 23:19:42 UTC 2015

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote: >> > I am not so easily confused by the new numbering; what the ISO is named is > orthogonal to what it contains, at least in my mind. Adding the date component means CentOS may release more than one iso per RH's minor versions. There isn't much of a consistent relationship between the RH release and

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote: > On 04/02/2015 10:59 AM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > >> It's not just the name of the ISO file. c.f. the VERSION_ID variable in >> /etc/os-release >> > In that particular place it is actually rather important, but that is > orthogonal to the ISO name. > > I agree, but this thread

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote: > On 04/02/2015 03:55 PM, Always Learning wrote: > >> Is there a commercial motive for this 'unwelcome by most' change ? >> > > Do you have data to prove that it is unwelcome by most? It is unwelcome > by you and a few others I've seen comment; what percentage of the list's >

> On 2 Apr 2015, at 06:41, Always Learning <centos at u64.u22.net> wrote: > > >> On Thu, 2015-04-02 at 00:51 -0400, Lamar Owen wrote: >> >> In my opinion, assigning sub-version numbers to what was originally >> intended to be, by Red Hat, quarterly updates (almost Service Packs, >> if you will, much like SGI's numbering of their Foundation and

On 04/02/15 00:51, Lamar Owen wrote: > On 04/01/2015 08:12 PM, Always Learning wrote: >> 1. What is the logically reason for this alleged "improvement" ? > > I never said it was an improvement. I just said that I didn't think it was > that big of a deal, and it boggles my mind that people are calling a change of > an ISO's file name 'unwise' and even

On 04/02/2015 04:43 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote: > >> On 04/02/2015 10:59 AM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: >> >>> It's not just the name of the ISO file. c.f. the VERSION_ID variable in >>> /etc/os-release >>> >> In that particular place it is actually rather important,

On 8/1/20 11:02 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: > ... > [lowen at localhost ~]$ rpm -qa | grep ^kernel|grep 147 > kernel-devel-4.18.0-147.8.1.el8_1.x86_64 > kernel-4.18.0-147.8.1.el8_1.x86_64 > kernel-modules-4.18.0-147.8.1.el8_1.x86_64 > kernel-core-4.18.0-147.8.1.el8_1.x86_64 > [lowen at localhost ~]$ Well, I sure fat-fingered that command.... let's try it again: [lowen at

On 8/1/20 5:00 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > I would wait and install everything as a group. We should have > something soon. First off, Johnny and all of the rest of the CentOS team, thank you for your efforts! Second, to all with this problem, I too experienced the issue (I posted on the CentOS-Devel list my findings).? To those who seem to think more testing could have prevented

Hello, I am not able to run this command given in the tutorial http://projects.jkraemer.net/acts_as_ferret/ *Inside your Rails project* Please use script/plugin install svn://projects.jkraemer.net/acts_as_ferret/tags/stable/acts_as_ferret gem is installed. i have added the desired line in environment.rb as well but while running this particular command of svn://.. nothing actually

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Greg Lindahl <lindahl at pbm.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 11:28:10AM +0100, Leon Fauster wrote: > > Am 03.12.2015 um 11:08 schrieb Greg Lindahl <lindahl at pbm.com>: > > > I wanted to help you by making sure that you were on the most recent > > > version, but, looking at the Centos.org website I was unable to figure

Am 03.12.2015 um 11:08 schrieb Greg Lindahl <lindahl at pbm.com>: > I wanted to help you by making sure that you were on the most recent > version, but, looking at the Centos.org website I was unable to figure > out if 7.2 was the tip. 7.1503? Is that 7.2? Beats me. CentOS 7.1511 (aka '7.2') not yet released ... > https://wiki.centos.org/Download appears to say that

On 04/01/2015 08:12 PM, Always Learning wrote: > 1. What is the logically reason for this alleged "improvement" ? I never said it was an improvement. I just said that I didn't think it was that big of a deal, and it boggles my mind that people are calling a change of an ISO's file name 'unwise' and even comparing it to a Microsoft move. I just don't see it as

Am 03.12.2015 um 11:39 schrieb Greg Lindahl <lindahl at pbm.com>: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 11:28:10AM +0100, Leon Fauster wrote: >> Am 03.12.2015 um 11:08 schrieb Greg Lindahl <lindahl at pbm.com>: >>> I wanted to help you by making sure that you were on the most recent >>> version, but, looking at the Centos.org website I was unable to figure >>>

On 09/13/2017 04:40 PM, Jerry Geis wrote: > I am running the propriatry NVIDIA driver 384.69 for GT 720 support. The ELrepo driver works very well for me with CentOS 7.4.1708 on a Dell Precision M6700.? Here's what I have: ++++++ [lowen at localhost ~]$ nvidia-detect -v Probing for supported NVIDIA devices... [10de:11be] NVIDIA Corporation GK104GLM [Quadro K3000M] This device requires the

On 04/07/2016 09:04 AM, Nux! wrote: > Well, by the looks of it, it bundles all the deps in one archive, so you no longer depend on system ones, but also you miss out on system updates. I use a commercial professional multitrack audio mixing package called Mixbus (derived from Ardour, but with specialized DSP for the summing and for plugins; the portion derived from Ardour is open source, the

Le 31/03/2015 20:30, Johnny Hughes a ?crit : >> I would have assumed that this release would be "7.1.1503", and the URL >> >>on at least one mirror has: >> >> >> >>http://mirror.fdcservers.net/centos/7.1.1503/ >> >> >> >>Guess if that's the new convention, I'll need to keep my ISO files >> >>sorted out

On 03/31/2015 04:24 PM, Alain P?an wrote: > Le 31/03/2015 20:30, Johnny Hughes a ?crit : >>> I would have assumed that this release would be "7.1.1503", and the URL >>> >>on at least one mirror has: >>> >> >>> >>http://mirror.fdcservers.net/centos/7.1.1503/ >>> >> >>> >>Guess if that's the new

Hi Gabe, Keeping track of where a package was installed from would be a nice feature. However it wouldn't be as reliable as comparing hashes to decide whether a package needs re-installation or not. H. On 11/8/19 12:37, Gabriel Becker wrote: > Hi Josh, > > There are a few issues I can think of with this. The primary one is that > CRAN(/Bioconductor) is not the only place one

On 03/31/2015 01:28 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 03/31/2015 12:31 PM, Greg Bailey wrote: >> On 03/31/2015 09:53 AM, Ryan Qian wrote: >>> As a CentOs newbie, I'm not sure, will we still have CentOS 7.1 which >>> derive from RHEL 7.1? >>> or this is the new naming conversion for CentOS 7. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> -Ryan >> >>