on 4-2-2009 10:40 AM rra...@comcast.net spake the
following:
> On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>
>> Ralph Angenendt wrote:
>>> rra...@comcast.net wrote:
>>>
What is the downside of sticking with 5.2
>>> No security fixes. And the cool kids on the block will laugh at you.
>> L
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> Ralph Angenendt wrote:
>> rra...@comcast.net wrote:
>>
>>> What is the downside of sticking with 5.2
>>>
>>
>> No security fixes. And the cool kids on the block will laugh at you.
>
> Look at today's announcement. Now I don't know if the security bugs
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
> rra...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> What is the downside of sticking with 5.2
>>
>
> No security fixes. And the cool kids on the block will laugh at you.
Look at today's announcement. Now I don't know if the security bugs
fixed where in the old 5.2 kernel or only in t
on 4-2-2009 6:53 AM rra...@comcast.net spake the
following:
> What is the downside of sticking with 5.2
Your hair will fall out and your ears will ring constantly.
You will gain weight that no amount of dieting and exercise will be able to
get rid of.
You will be the laughing stock of all the "co
rra...@comcast.net wrote:
> What is the downside of sticking with 5.2
No security fixes. And the cool kids on the block will laugh at you.
Ralph
pgp6YxJiPFgO8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos
rra...@comcast.net wrote:
> What is the downside of sticking with 5.2
>
It is EOLed. That is all fixes to 5.2 are 5.3.
So there is little choice unless you take on the whole management issue.
BTW, I had some systems that would simply NOT do an install with the 5.2
boot CD. I HAD to install w
6 matches
Mail list logo
