Burn the references with fire.
If there are any references to litko then they should be treated equally.
Both are dead.
On Wednesday, April 13, 2016, Christoph Galuschka
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Am 13.04.2016 um 16:20 schrieb John R. Dennison:
>
>> Someone made mention
I bugged Jim about this daily on IRC for a bit, and he had gotten some
tractIon from legal, but that was several months ago.
Again, a link to http://docs.redhat.com would be nice if nothing else.
On Saturday, February 14, 2015, Fabian Arrotin arr...@centos.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED
The rules I went by weren't so cut and dried. EPEL was recommended because
it is recommended -- the epel-release package is in centos-extras, packages
from it are built to Fedora guidelines, are from Fedora packagers, it
endeavors to not overlap upstream, and -- perhaps most importantly -- it is
Patrick, looks fine to me. Thanks for the work -- when I did a major
revision I tried to remove some of the rot and got tired of trying, along
with refactoring the page in general. Your dedication is appreciated.
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:34 AM, PatrickD Garvey patrickdgarv...@gmail.com
wrote:
I did the last major rewrite of the AdditionalRepos page, in large part
because of issues we see repeatedly on the IRC channels. The repos placed
in the known problem section are there for a good reason -- they replace
base packages by default, or they're poorly maintained, leading to security
then you should seriously
consider whether or not those systems can connect to the Internet, or
if you should get the glibc from Scientific Linux that has the 3
patches that do not cause an issue in the meantime.
Tom Sorensen
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS
6 matches
Mail list logo