On Oct 13, 2013, at 8:21 AM, Reindl Harald <[email protected]> wrote:

> i do *not* understand your argumentation
> 
> * if you have a virtual server *you* are the one typing "yum upgrade"
> * if you have a managed server demand them to do their job
> * why does security not bother somebody these days?
> * CentOS 6.3/6.4 are *security* updates
> 
> that's the same someone says "CentOS 5.5 is fine"
> no, it is not -> type "yum upgrade" and you are on 5.9

Let's not get off-topic here.

Adam, we don't have a CentOS 6.2 build bot, but we support 5.x and 6.x. I think 
that you will be fine.

J

> 
> Am 13.10.2013 17:04, schrieb Adam W. Dace:
>> The simple answer for me is bandwidth, bandwidth...and oh yes, bandwidth.
>> 
>> I've actually been using Rackspace for a virtual server parent cache for a 
>> while and they are awesome.
>> However, they charge for bandwidth...so I've been hacking parent.config like 
>> crazy in an attempt
>> to avoid -any- video going across the Internet.  It sucks kind of.
>> 
>> I actually found Linode from a banner ad on a website somewhere, and these 
>> wonderful people include
>> 2 TB of bandwidth for essentially the same monthly cost.  That their distro 
>> is a little old honestly doesn't bother me.
>> 
>> Thanks for the vote of confidence...think I'm going to just fire up a 
>> virtual machine and give it a shot.  :-)
>> 
>> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Reindl Harald <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>    Am 13.10.2013 <tel:13.10.2013> 16:45, schrieb Adam W. Dace:
>>> I've got a few days before I commit myself, but I think I've found a 
>>> cheaper alternative to Rackspace to host my
>>> parent web cache.  :-)
>>> 
>>> Anyways, all they have available for CentOS is v6.2 and I was wondering if 
>>> anyone's compiled / tested ATS on it.
>> 
>>    besides the answer below short ago why in the world CentOS 6.2?!
>>    current is 6.4 and since CentOS/RHEL has a stable API/ABI it
>>    is pretty dumb to ignore these security updates which
>>    you are receive with yum - so whoever can offer CentOS6
>>    but *not* CentOS 6.2 because this is a specific patchlevel
>> 
>> 
>>    -------- Original-Nachricht --------
>>    Betreff:        Re: [VOTE] Release v4.0.2
>>    Datum:  Sat, 12 Oct 2013 14:01:47 +0800
>>    Von:    Mohd Akhbar <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>    Antwort an:     [email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>    An:     [email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>> 
>>    Compiled and tested on Centos 6.4 without any prob. +1
> 

Reply via email to