Les Mikesell wrote:
The Centos project follows the requirements, replacing only what is necessary so they maintain bug for bug compatibility
IIRC, the phrase "bug for bug compatibility" was used by the Wine project to describe the fact that their implementation matches Windows behavior, which is sometimes "buggy" with regards to their documentation. If the Wine project built an implementation that was faithful to the documentation, some Windows applications which relied on the actual behavior of Windows (buggy though it may be) would not work.
There is no reason to believe that the CentOS group will not correct bugs simply because Red Hat does not. Their aim is binary, not "bug for bug" compatibility.
Can we please avoid using that phrase to describe Linux distributions?
