[WBEL-users] Re: [WBEL-users]OT whitebox: the pros and cons of hitchiking

[Pete Stevens]

On Thu, 20 May 2004, Petr Klima wrote:

> > I'd like to re-emphasize that the "ambition" of the other RHEL derivitives
> > is really what keeps me away from them. I don't need to worry about some
> > guy's new great ideas. Their speed of updates is irrelevant to me if I
> > can't know that what I'll be getting will always be as close to RHEL as
> > humanly possible. I just need something stable and compatible. Otherwise
> > I'd run Fedora or something.
> >
>
> Agree ...
>
>   but WBEL DO NOT HAVE security updates for 10 days? It is not an "guy's
> new great idea", it is a PROBLEM. I run it on servers in Internet not in
> safer LAN.
>   I feel. I made a mistake. I decided to go with WBEL because CDs was
> made really quickly (much quicker then CentOS), but as I see in Red Hat
> Security Advisory there is big lack of making updates for WBEL (CentOS
> have all of them ...) .
>
>   Yes, I can make my own packages from RH .srpm's . I do it. But, WHAT
> the ditribution is FOR, when I must do what maintainer should do.
> Especialy when no one other can to do that?

A couple of points,

a: The binary updates will be ready when they are. Whining will not help.
If you want them quickly then pay Redhat. Source RPMS are available from
Redhat. If it's that vital compile or buy it.

b: For those of you who can't read, this is the front page of the Whitebox
site.

What is the goal for White Box Linux?

To provide an unencumbered RPM based Linux distribution that retains enough
compatibility with Red Hat Linux to allow easy upgrades and to retain
compatibility with their Errata srpms.


You'll notice it doesn't mention binary RPMS, but does mention source rpms.


Apologies for being off topic.

Pete

--
Pete Stevens
pete@ex-parrot.com
Find my cat -> http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pete/lost-esme.html

My theology, briefly, is that the universe was dictated but not signed.
                                                  -- Christopher Morley