Fedora = "the darker side of the Internet?"

[Ian Malone]

On 11 October 2013 11:40, Tim <ignored_mailbox at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 00:00 -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>> But someone should tell them that there is plenty of light on RPM-land
>> (considering they put Fedora, RHEL and CentOS in the same bag).
>
> I think you all missed their point about wanting an install that has a
> longer lifespan.  They're jumping ship from Debian, and avoiding Red Hat
> derived distros, because they all change versions too often, and abandon
> prior releases too quickly for them.  I understand how they feel.
>

> Yes, CentOS, et cetera, have long life span versions, too.  But I
> haven't compared the length of theirs to the long term Ubuntu one.  And

Life cycle of RHEL is over ten years per release, the derived distros,
Scientific and CentOS could be similar, but of course you really need
to be looking at paid support if you want to carry on that long.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#Life-cycle_dates
It's long enough that in most cases you find you want to upgrade
before the end of life.
Ubuntu LTS is five years.

> if you already came from a Debian background, Ubuntu is a closer move
> than a Red Hat styled release.

Ubuntu is increasingly being customised away from Debian.

-- 
imalone
http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk