CentOS 5.6 release imminent

Submitted by dag on Mon, 2011/04/04 - 23:06

Yes, we have heard it a few times before, but this time it is true. CentOS 5.6 is being seeded to mirrors and work has started to bring the Release Notes up to speed. Already 82 days after RHEL 5.6.

Next up is CentOS 6.0, hopefully this one is released before RHEL 6.1, since the RHEL 6.1 Beta is already two weeks out. The fact that CentOS 6.0 is already 145 days behind RHEL 6.0 is something the team will have to think about. Leveraging the community by opening up the QA process is a no-brainer to me.

We'll find out the coming set of RHEL releases, only the future will tell... But denying there is a problem, or insulting criticism on the forums is not a very promising sign of improvement :-(

Update: And today (9/4/2011) the release was announced !

Are you still directly involved?

Or did you stay "given up in frustration"?

(I looked at trying to get involved last year with a view to seeing if I could help resurrect the defunct s390x port, but a brief perusal of the forums made it seem pretty clear that asking to help would be a waste of time...)

I am no longer involved in

I am no longer involved in the CentOS team. You can read my resignation letter here:


The lack of communication

The lack of communication (and abrupt nature of what little there has been) has led me to consider moving away from CentOS this release.

I'm a huge fan of the project, and have used it on dozens of live systems both privately and in business, but any community driven effort that seems hell-bent on actively discouraging community effort ("don't bother helping, it's quicker for us to just do it than train you" - ?!) beggars belief, and as for the treatment of the guy who was offering hardware to the project the other week, well...

I learned Linux on Red Hat derivative and re-packaged distributions and really thought CentOS had it right, but I thought the C stood for 'Community' and there doesn't seem to be a lot of that at the moment. I was even ready to try and help out with re-packaging and QA when I saw CentOS 6 was taking some time, but the way the 'community' treated everyone that offered I didn't want the grief!

Maybe it's time to trade my RHCSA in, and put the time I had spent training for RHCE into learning 'Ubuntu Professional'.

Chris, I share your


I share your frustration.

I have been using Centos as my main Linux distro but I am starting to think of other alternatives.

I will hate to see the Centos Project failing.

How can we help?

I would like to help but I do not know much about releasing and testing an OS.

Would it help to dedicate part of my hardware as a test machine? I am running both KVM and ESXi virtualization on 2 separate machines.

Any other ways to help?





Centos roks. Forget the corporate pigs and rats.

Now have 388 days uptime on CENTOS 4.8.

Centos roks.


Thanks for this valuable and

Thanks for this valuable and eloquent contribution to the comments !

Please document the workflow, etc

We potential helpers are completely in the dark with respect to what is done to get a new CentOS release out of the door. Knowing more about that would make the bottlenecks visible, and hint people at useful ways to help out.

145 days (and counting) after RHEL 6.0 just isn't pretty. And CentOS is way too valuable a resource to do down the drain as it seems to be headed.

I concur.

I concur.

thoughts on Scientific Linux as an alternative

Dag, do you feel that CentOS is still a better alternative than Scientific Linux for a RHEL clone? I am curious why you didn't move to become a contributor for Scientific Linux when you left the CentOS team?

Whether Scientific Linux is a

Whether Scientific Linux is a better alternative depends on what you think is important. I certainly think SL a better alternative today in most aspects, so yes I can recommend it. The delay in release is not the only factor, communication transparency and honesty I value more.

My role within the CentOS project was to help with the promotion team (conferences, presentations, newsletter, ...) and with wiki/documentation. I spend about 15 to 20 days every year at conferences and events around Europe at my own expense.

After leaving the CentOS team I was no longer interested to spend so much time and effort for a project, and instead I spend the time on other projects and recently with my newborn daughter and renovating the house.

But I still have some CentOS systems though.

RE:thoughts on Scientific Linux as an alternative

I have also been following the less than "positive" news regarding CentOS and have started looking at SL6 as the future platform for all my current CentOS boxes..

From some reading it looks like the Development community is much larger i.e. edu backed versus a group of (talented) individuals..

CentOS has been hailed (AFAIK) as 100% binary compatible to RHEL.. but SL has not..
thoughts.. ?


That is what the CentOS

That is what the CentOS people say, but in fact Scientific Linux has their own tools to check for binary compatibility. It seems the CentOS developers were mainly badmouthing Scientific Linux to FUD their competition.

My take on this is:


Also read the rest of this thread, it's quite an eye-opener. I was quite harsh in my mail and I stand by my assessement, but I should have been less brutal verbally :)


I think it's important to note that, while Scientific Linux has released SL 6.0 (I've downloaded the Live Version and will test it), they haven't yet released either 4.9 or 5.6. So they obviously had different priorities. I happen to agree with the CentOS team's decision on this one, but that's purely my opinion.

Hi Ron,It's true that

Hi Ron,

It's true that Scientific Linux has different priorities, but that is not essential in the question whether CentOS is doing a good job. The project is called Community Enterprise, but is neither Community (they project is pretty closed), nor Enterprise (security updates are delayed for up to 3 months).

And I am not even discussing CentOS 6.0... From Wikipedia you can see that CentOS has longer and longer delayed than it used to 2 years ago. So somewhere something is slacking and the CentOS team is largely ignoring/denying this in public discussions.