Linux - EnterpriseThis forum is for all items relating to using Linux in the Enterprise.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Well, not really. I have been applying with the
released updates only since I installed 4 and my
version has stayed at 4, not 4.x.
I think if one updates/upgrades the core/base,
then the 4 becomes whichever is the current.
So, the question still is whether updating/upgrading
the core/base in addition to the updates is better,
or this does not really matter as long as I keep up
with the regular updates even though I remain at 4.
in what wqay do you remain at 4? i don't really follow that. i would assume that if you do a full "yum upgrade" then youre centos-release rpm would be upgraded, and that would be what defines the release version you are deemed to be running. if you have applied all the updates then you will be on the latest version of centos available, and subversion numbers merely stand to provide a noted landmark in terms of the base installation level.
I'm just confused as to why you'd want to stay on CentOS 4, and not install the kernel updates. I would install all updates, including the kernel updates. I trust RHEL and CentOS, they haven't burned me yet.
Wait a minute folks, we are posting to the enterprise forum where being a day late as long as your not a dollar short is not a big deal. Perhaps if you are upgrading 50 desktops, bleeding edge with some testing is acceptable. However leaving servers a version behind and just patching for security issues makes good sense.