EL6 RPMs for Fedora 14 Issue

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 12/22/2011 02:48 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On 12/22/2011 06:50 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> On 12/22/2011 01:09 PM, Peter Dufault wrote:
>>> On Dec 22, 2011, at 6:49 , Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>
>>>> CentOS is a server distro, which is aiming at "long term API
>>>> stability".
>>>> In general, it's a good choice to run a web-server or a data base
>>>> server
>>>> on it, but is a bad choice for development purposes.
>>> I would have agreed until I found the EPEL (Extra Packages for
>>> Enterprise Linux) packages. Centos/Epel may not be good for working
>>> on the head, but it is good for working on products, and with the
>>> EPEL packages I've only had to build a few things myself.
>> Well, EPEL doesn't change much about the key weakness of CentOS: The API
>> and ABI freeze CentOS is based on.
>>
>> I.e. one sooner or later one gets stuck in CentOS being tied to ancient
>> ABI/APIs which will prevent packages on it to take advantage of new
>> features or from being added to CentOS at all.
>>
> And that's what is good about it for "products" as Peter referred to
> them.
Correct ... vs. development == here: rtems-4.11.

> When the products/hardware is updated, The RTEMS version will be
> updated to the latest with matching tools and development OS.
That's not what I am talking about.

I am referring to people who are wanting to work on/develope on new SW 
on 5 year old designs (CentOS5) or older CentOS4.

This kind of undertaking is non-reasonable and non-sensical.

Spear-head development/the bleeding edge needs to take place in a 
rolling release model, until "the development is finished".

When it's "finished", it's reasonable to switch to freeze the 
environment on what's current then.

> It may
> be foreign to your experience but it is the way products with over an
> 18 month lifespan are supported.
Don't try to generalize your limited views.

Ralf