Linux Archive

Linux Archive (
-   CentOS Docs (
-   -   vservers: was: Article for wiki consideration (

R P Herrold 05-29-2008 03:25 PM

vservers: was: Article for wiki consideration
On Thu, 29 May 2008, Ralph Angenendt wrote:

Only if that person also wants to support that on the #irc channel and
can explain why we support one type of vserver and don't support the
other :)

a bit harsh -- the wiki article as written is to address
_broken_ vserver matters

I worked a bit on wordsmithing part of that, hoping for the
emergence of a 'grafted on' vserver which was respectful of
what I (and I think most of us) would consider a 'CentOS'
server, with the tests of the section:

You are saying I was lied to and mislead?

Yes, a true CentOS installation has a CentOS kernel, the
CentOS centos-release package, the CentOS yum package, and no
modification or additions to the contents of
/etc/yum.repos.d/. All dependencies will be satisfied, and
except for configuration files (see: man rpm), an

$ sudo rpm -Va

will run silently except for expected configuration file

A true CentOS system also may be freely updated at any time.
We add this requirement as security fixes also issue
asynchronously. One indication that there may be a problem is
that the rack hosting vendor offers CentOS 4.X (where X is a
digit), rather than CentOS 4, and so forth; the CentOS team
(and indeed the upstream distribution stabilizer) do not
permit 'holding back' at a non-current, prior 'point' version,
and still representing the product as the 'genuine' article.


So long as any sub-set install has addons which is packaged,
satisfies all dependencies [and thus is without material
excludes= holdbacks], and does not break rpm -V on packaged
CentOS core items (or the subsystem the inquirant is having
issues with), I've no problem with discussing and trying to
support it in IRC

We have people wander in with hand compiled php, MySQL AB
binaries, and config file edits; they chose to fork and are
on their own, until they revert to something CentOS ships.

So long as a misbehaving package is ours, and not tampered
with, I think we have some obligation to respond in IRC, and
in the bug tracker; but contrarywise, when the packages from
others, I certainly have no compunction about referring the
person back to the packging source, where (one assumes) it is
known as to quirks and supported.

-- Russ herrold
CentOS-docs mailing list

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:02 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.