New distro question

[Tom Buskey]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Jarod Wilson <jarod at wilsonet.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 20:50 -0400, Frank DiPrete wrote:
> >
> > Ben Scott wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Frank DiPrete <fdiprete at comcast.net>
> wrote:
> > >>  MIS would be just as comfy with fedora as with RH. From a support
> and
> > >>  admin point of view it's pretty much the same.
> > >
> > >   Speaking as a professional MIS weenie, I can say that the main thing
> > > that annoys about Fedora is their release cycle.  Having to do a major
> > > upgrade to my OS every year, or living without security updates, isn't
> > > a choice I relish.
> > >
> > yes, the release cycle for fedora is a bit fierce.
>
> But that's the fun part. :)
>

There's the rub for us MIS types.  Fedora works great but after 2 years, the
updates go away if you don't keep upgrading.  A repo might not exist for a 2
year old release if something needs to be added that wasn't on the dist. CD.

For my desktops, I probably want the latest & greatest tools.  For my
servers, I just want it to work and be secure.

IMO this release cycle is one of the major differences between Linux and
Solaris.
I just ran a 1995 copy of traceroute from SunOS (not Solaris)  on a stock
Solaris 10 box.  That'd be Redhat 2.0 era?

I lost count of the number of times the kernel outran VMware and Win4Lin
installs.

On the otherhand, each update of an app or the kernel brings bug, speed and
security fixes and might even add features that are desired.  Solaris'
awk/tar/etc is bug for bug compatible with the 1995 version.

Pros and cons each way
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20080409/ac50a1dc/attachment.html