Yes, I also think that updating kernel or other main component frequently is not advisable. We should update kernel when we have to do it. We patch kernel manually in most time.
On 6/24/06, Rafiu Fakunle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Karanbir, Please move this thread/post to openfiler-devel R. Karanbir Singh wrote: > Hi Rafiu, > > Rafiu Fakunle wrote: >> Jason, >> >> 1) It's dynamic versioning package management and repository format > > which is largely unproven and has been shrugged off by most of the > open source projects so far. Conary itself has such a high turnover > rate that even regular scheduled update projects are staying away from > it. I've had conversations with various people, over the last year and > a half, about Conary - and mostly people agree its too nascent to > deploy in a stable environ. > >> 2) Enterprise kernel with support for more filesystems (ext3, XFS, >> reiser4 etc) > > Enterprise by what standards ? its neither a Redhat nor Suse setup, > and apart from them and Ubuntu, I seriously doubt anyone has the > resources to really stabilise and maintain such an Enterprise setup. > But then I suppose the word 'Enterprise' itself is quite a loose term, > might imply many things. > > btw, a number of xfs upstream have just moved to Redhat, with sgi > under chap.11 > >> 3) Kernel closely tracks upstream > > what is upstream for rpath ? do you have a url with detals / I've just > had a look on their website and cant find anything. > > _______________________________________________ Openfiler-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openfiler.com/mailman/listinfo/openfiler-users
_______________________________________________ Openfiler-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openfiler.com/mailman/listinfo/openfiler-users
