Seems like DreamHost considers Red Hat Fedora users second class citizens:
http://www.dreamhost.com/dreamscape/2013/06/03/change-is-in-the-air-dreamhos...
Am 10.10.2013 22:48, schrieb linux.whiz@gmail.com:
Seems like DreamHost considers Red Hat Fedora users second class citizens: http://www.dreamhost.com/dreamscape/2013/06/03/change-is-in-the-air-dreamhos...
i can't see anything new there which is not bullshit and the end of the day - Ubuntu and Cannoncial does *nothing* at their own in case of the real infracstructure, shiny interfaces and NIH syndromes are nothing with worth
On 10/10/2013 03:48 PM, linux.whiz@gmail.com wrote:
Seems like DreamHost considers Red Hat Fedora users second class citizens:
http://www.dreamhost.com/dreamscape/2013/06/03/change-is-in-the-air-dreamhos...
You can get both Fedora and CentOS on Linode and Digital Ocean. Vote with your money.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 04:30:59PM -0500, Steven Stern wrote:
You can get both Fedora and CentOS on Linode and Digital Ocean. Vote with your money.
And Digital Ocean was good about working with me with the F19 update.
You can get both Fedora and CentOS on Linode and Digital Ocean. Vote with your money.
DigitalOcean is not trusteable, they have deleted my virtual machines and tole me that I have violated they AUP/TOS, I have asked how and they never replied, if you start using some CPU or bandwith they will ask you to go out.
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013, Itamar Reis Peixoto wrote:
You can get both Fedora and CentOS on Linode and Digital Ocean. Vote with your money.
DigitalOcean is not trusteable, they have deleted my virtual machines and tole me that I have violated they AUP/TOS, I have asked how and they never replied, if you start using some CPU or bandwith they will ask you to go out.
I use cotse.net for my virtual server. I don't know about super high bandwidth, since I run a personal webpage, email server, etc. and nothing commercial, but it's "unmetered" and I've never had a problem, even with occasional large file transfers. They have a very liberal TOS.
They offer CentOS and Fedora on their virtual machines. I use Fedora on my home machine, but switched to CentOS on the virtual machine because it's a hassle to frequently upgrade, and going from fedora 16 to 18 was impossible without reprovisioning the machine.
billo
Am 11.10.2013 17:45, schrieb Bill Oliver:
They offer CentOS and Fedora on their virtual machines. I use Fedora on my home machine, but switched to CentOS on the virtual machine because it's a hassle to frequently upgrade, and going from fedora 16 to 18 was impossible without reprovisioning the machine.
because you can't skip a version
i maintain around 20 production servers over years running with fedora and *all of them* where upgraded from F9 to F18 with yum as well the upgrade to F19 is tested and easy
you only need to follow the instructions and in case of GRUB2 it is also easy and painless to move /boot in case you have a own virtual disk for it to get the needed free space
hence you can even do this on one virtual machine and blow the dd-image including the partition table to the other machines if they are maintained well and have the same software based from the same golden master
so no - it is *not* impossible
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.10.2013 17:45, schrieb Bill Oliver:
They offer CentOS and Fedora on their virtual machines. I use Fedora on my home machine, but switched to CentOS on the virtual machine because it's a hassle to frequently upgrade, and going from fedora 16 to 18 was impossible without reprovisioning the machine.
because you can't skip a version
i maintain around 20 production servers over years running with fedora and *all of them* where upgraded from F9 to F18 with yum as well the upgrade to F19 is tested and easy
you only need to follow the instructions and in case of GRUB2 it is also easy and painless to move /boot in case you have a own virtual disk for it to get the needed free space
hence you can even do this on one virtual machine and blow the dd-image including the partition table to the other machines if they are maintained well and have the same software based from the same golden master
so no - it is *not* impossible
Sigh. Yes, I know you have to go through 17 to get to 18, Mr. Harald. And, no, it's not just a matter of "following instructions." In fact, almost nothing that requires significant technical skill is just a matter of "following instructions." Arrogant savants forget the fact that they paid a lot of dues learning the little tricks that *aren't* in the instructions. Your tell, for instance, is that you brag about upgrading 20 machines from F9 to F18. You may not be willing to admit it, but I suspect *somewhere* in there, there were a few gliches. But, because you have done it a bunch of times, you know how to deal with them. That's very different that doing it for the first time.
I see this a lot in my other area of expertise -- forensic pathology. I train pathologists to do forensic autopsies. For an uncomplicated forensic autopsy on, say, a drug death, it takes me about an hour and a half, not including staff time in prep and cleanup. My residents take about four to six hours, and still get it wrong. It's not because they are stupid, they are not. It's not because they don't know what they should be doing -- they study hard. It's not because they are lazy. It's because no two cases are exactly the same, and because they have to learn how to do things both correctly *and* efficiently. My first autopsy took me 10 hours. My 20th took me 4 hours. My 8000th took me 45 minutes.
It's also true with music. I have played an instrument for many years. It's easy for me to "follow instructions," and pick up a new tune. My wife started playing the piano six months ago. It turns out that it's not so easy for her to simply "follow instructions" and play.
The same thing is true with system administration. System administration really isn't just a matter of following instructions, else a monkey could do it quickly and efficiently. Instead, unless you are simply loading multiple copies of the same machine image, complications come up and there's a little problem solving involved. I've done a lot of system admin, but I had never upgraded a fedora distribution (having used other distros for the past 15 years). The first time was not a charm. Most people *didn't* have flawless upgrades from F16 to F17, particularly the first time they did it, as is demonstrated by a quick internet search on "problem upgrading from F16 to F17" and "problem upgrading from F17 to F18." '
It seems many people didn't find it as mindless and mechanical a process as you pretend.
And, in fact, there's a point where it simply doesn't matter. There's a limited amount of time most folk are willing to spend on an upgrade path that is a pain in the ass -- in spite of your assertion. When you hit the point where you say "screw it, this isn't worth the hassle," the difference between "impossible" and "not impossible but not worth the trouble" is functionally nil.
bill
Am 11.10.2013 23:53, schrieb Bill Oliver:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.10.2013 17:45, schrieb Bill Oliver:
They offer CentOS and Fedora on their virtual machines. I use Fedora on my home machine, but switched to CentOS on the virtual machine because it's a hassle to frequently upgrade, and going from fedora 16 to 18 was impossible without reprovisioning the machine.
because you can't skip a version
i maintain around 20 production servers over years running with fedora and *all of them* where upgraded from F9 to F18 with yum as well the upgrade to F19 is tested and easy
you only need to follow the instructions and in case of GRUB2 it is also easy and painless to move /boot in case you have a own virtual disk for it to get the needed free space
hence you can even do this on one virtual machine and blow the dd-image including the partition table to the other machines if they are maintained well and have the same software based from the same golden master
so no - it is *not* impossible
Sigh. Yes, I know you have to go through 17 to get to 18, Mr. Harald. And, no, it's not just a matter of "following instructions." In fact, almost nothing that requires significant technical skill is just a matter of "following instructions." Arrogant savants forget the fact that they paid a lot of dues learning the little tricks that *aren't* in the instructions. Your tell, for instance, is that you brag about upgrading 20 machines from F9 to F18. You may not be willing to admit it, but I suspect *somewhere* in there, there were a few gliches. But, because you have done it a bunch of times, you know how to deal with them. That's very different that doing it for the first time.
2006 i switched from one day to another completly to Fedora
this was short before FC6 was released, so my very first "no fallback machine" was installed with FC5 and two days later upgraded to FC6 and while 1.5 years later i started with production servers based on Fedora 9 i even skipped F9 and upgraded directly from F8 to F10 on desktop machines
so *no* you do not need years of technical skills, learning by doing works
Am 11.10.2013 23:59, schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 11.10.2013 23:53, schrieb Bill Oliver:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.10.2013 17:45, schrieb Bill Oliver:
They offer CentOS and Fedora on their virtual machines. I use Fedora on my home machine, but switched to CentOS on the virtual machine because it's a hassle to frequently upgrade, and going from fedora 16 to 18 was impossible without reprovisioning the machine.
because you can't skip a version
i maintain around 20 production servers over years running with fedora and *all of them* where upgraded from F9 to F18 with yum as well the upgrade to F19 is tested and easy
you only need to follow the instructions and in case of GRUB2 it is also easy and painless to move /boot in case you have a own virtual disk for it to get the needed free space
hence you can even do this on one virtual machine and blow the dd-image including the partition table to the other machines if they are maintained well and have the same software based from the same golden master
so no - it is *not* impossible
Sigh. Yes, I know you have to go through 17 to get to 18, Mr. Harald. And, no, it's not just a matter of "following instructions." In fact, almost nothing that requires significant technical skill is just a matter of "following instructions." Arrogant savants forget the fact that they paid a lot of dues learning the little tricks that *aren't* in the instructions. Your tell, for instance, is that you brag about upgrading 20 machines from F9 to F18. You may not be willing to admit it, but I suspect *somewhere* in there, there were a few gliches. But, because you have done it a bunch of times, you know how to deal with them. That's very different that doing it for the first time.
2006 i switched from one day to another completly to Fedora
this was short before FC6 was released, so my very first "no fallback machine" was installed with FC5 and two days later upgraded to FC6 and while 1.5 years later i started with production servers based on Fedora 9 i even skipped F9 and upgraded directly from F8 to F10 on desktop machines
so *no* you do not need years of technical skills, learning by doing works
and i forgot to mention that this very first machine with Fedora was my primary workstation with no fallback and upgraded from F5 to F11 until it died without a single time re-install from scratch, honestly i have never in my life re-installed a linux machine from scratch and move disks from old to new hardware - there exists *nothing* in case of booting a Linux system which can't be fixed with a Live-CD
On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 17:53 -0400, Bill Oliver wrote:
Sigh. Yes, I know you have to go through 17 to get to 18, Mr. Harald. And, no, it's not just a matter of "following instructions." In fact, almost nothing that requires significant technical skill is just a matter of "following instructions." Arrogant savants forget the fact that they paid a lot of dues learning the little tricks that *aren't* in the instructions. Your tell, for instance, is that you brag about upgrading 20 machines from F9 to F18. You may not be willing to admit it, but I suspect *somewhere* in there, there were a few gliches. But, because you have done it a bunch of times, you know how to deal with them. That's very different that doing it for the first time.
This page helps quite a bit:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedora_using_yum
Note that is the live update via yum which can be a bit more trickier. I can't recall serious issues with upgrades using the normal upgrade procedure. I'm sure there have been some, but none that were serious enough to note.
...Jeff
Jeff Gustafson wrote:
On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 17:53 -0400, Bill Oliver wrote:
Sigh. Yes, I know you have to go through 17 to get to 18, Mr. Harald. And, no, it's not just a matter of "following instructions." In fact, almost nothing that requires significant technical skill is just a matter of "following instructions." Arrogant savants forget the fact that they paid a lot of dues learning the little tricks that *aren't* in the instructions. Your tell, for instance, is that you brag about upgrading 20 machines from F9 to F18. You may not be willing to admit it, but I suspect *somewhere* in there, there were a few gliches. But, because you have done it a bunch of times, you know how to deal with them. That's very different that doing it for the first time.
This page helps quite a bit:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedora_using_yum
Note that is the live update via yum which can be a bit more trickier. I can't recall serious issues with upgrades using the normal upgrade procedure. I'm sure there have been some, but none that were serious enough to note.
What do you consider "normal upgrade?" preupdate? fedup? vudo (sp?) or someone's scripts? It used to be easy, now in general it hangs some percent of the time, or takes many times the time to reinstall. If an upgrade won't complete in four hours on a 4 core, 32GB RAM, SSD system, it's hung, and advice to let it run is silly, the fedup procedure is worthless on many machines.Posts saying things like "worked for me, be patient, finished in about 30 hours" confirm that.
...Jeff
On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 17:53 -0400, Bill Oliver wrote:
System administration really isn't just a matter of following instructions, else a monkey could do it quickly and efficiently.
If it really was as simple as following a set of instructions, which it isn't, it could do it all by itself.
Installation program = set of instructions
Just about all of us know that some customisation is required. Whether that be to make it conform to personal preference, or to get the thing to actually work.
The install routines are not magic. No automatic process is. They just pick from predetermined choices based on certain criteria. Criteria which doesn't always make the best choice.
It's like those hideous multiple choice forms we have to fill in from time to time. You come across questions where none of the choices are correct. When you explain this, and your situation, to someone who tries to help you, they invariably pick the least appropriate choice for you.
Sometimes I wonder whether Microsoft programmers are hired using a multiple choice form, where dumbest answers gets them in.
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Tim ignored_mailbox@yahoo.com.au wrote:
Sometimes I wonder whether Microsoft programmers are hired using a multiple choice form, where dumbest answers gets them in.
Not an indictment of any given country, but programming jobs in today's world often go the the lowest price. I wouldn't think Microsoft is an exception.
http://www.microsoft-careers.com/go/Programmer-Jobs-in-India/195235/
FC
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM, linux.whiz@gmail.com linux.whiz@gmail.comwrote:
Seems like DreamHost considers Red Hat Fedora users second class citizens:
http://www.dreamhost.com/dreamscape/2013/06/03/change-is-in-the-air-dreamhos...
Nah, they simply seem to come from Debian land and hence have a Debian-centric view of the world. Ubuntu surely is also very supportive of firms willing to announce a swith to their distro. ;)
About the creative writing ("darker side of the net") I take it as just a tongue in cheek comment. 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).
*Year-end deferred revenue balance exceeds a billion dollars, up 15% year-over-year* http://investors.redhat.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=751668
Red Hat Is Still On Target To Nearly Triple Revenues In Three Years, CEO Says Julie Bort Apr. 2, 2013, 5:06 PM 1,362
Red Hat, the first and only open source software company to reach over $1 billion in revenue, is still on track to nearly triple its revenue to $3 billion by 2016, CEO Jim Whitehurst said in an interview.
I'M PRETTY CONFIDENT, thus, that the lights won't go out in "the dark side of the Internet" ;p
FC
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 if you already came from a Debian background, Ubuntu is a closer move than a Red Hat styled release.
Am 11.10.2013 12:40, schrieb Tim:
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.
that must be why RHEL/CentOS has a lifespan of 10 years
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.
they also did not
otherwise they would not write bullshit like they are happy about 5 years support while Redhat has 10 years and a extended support of 13 years
https://www.google.at/search?q=rhel+lifecycle and click on the first link https://access.redhat.com/site/support/policy/updates/errata/
no idea why people who can't use Google all the time spread FUD
if you already came from a Debian background, Ubuntu is a closer move than a Red Hat styled release.
which has *nothing* to do with "the darker side of the Internet" it's a matter of expierience and qualification
Allegedly, on or about 11 October 2013, Reindl Harald sent:
which has *nothing* to do with "the darker side of the Internet"
That part of their message was *CLEARLY* humorous.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 10/11/2013 01:19 PM, Tim wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 11 October 2013, Reindl Harald sent:
which has *nothing* to do with "the darker side of the Internet"
That part of their message was *CLEARLY* humorous.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
On 11 October 2013 19:01, Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 10/11/2013 01:19 PM, Tim wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 11 October 2013, Reindl Harald sent:
which has *nothing* to do with "the darker side of the Internet"
That part of their message was *CLEARLY* humorous.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
If you read the post it does look like a star wars 'dark side' joke. Unfortunate choice of phrase though given recent events like the silk road revelations.
Tim:
That part of their message was *CLEARLY* humorous.>
Stephen Gallagher
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I *keep* on using *what* word?
Am 12.10.2013 08:54, schrieb Tim:
Tim:
That part of their message was *CLEARLY* humorous.>
Stephen Gallagher
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I *keep* on using *what* word?
the word "clearly"? where do you see the OP laughing? where do you see smilies in the "artcile"? your definition of "clearly" is *clearly* broken
-------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: Fedora = "the darker side of the Internet?" Datum: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 15:48:25 -0500 Von: linux.whiz@gmail.com linux.whiz@gmail.com Antwort an: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org An: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Seems like DreamHost considers Red Hat Fedora users second class citizens: http://www.dreamhost.com/dreamscape/2013/06/03/change-is-in-the-air-dreamhos...
On Sat, 12 Oct 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 12.10.2013 08:54, schrieb Tim:
Tim:
That part of their message was *CLEARLY* humorous.>
Stephen Gallagher
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I *keep* on using *what* word?
the word "clearly"? where do you see the OP laughing? where do you see smilies in the "artcile"? your definition of "clearly" is *clearly* broken
Get them now. Write-only memories are available for only a $1/GB in TB lots. Get them while they last. Sales ends February 14.
Tim:
I *keep* on using *what* word?
Reindl Harald:
the word "clearly"?
I disagree. I've only participated in this thread about three or four times, by now. That's hardly cause for saying I "keep on" saying anything. Nor do I insist that something is clear in other threads. The other poster is confusing me with someone else.
where do you see the OP laughing? where do you see smilies in the "artcile"? your definition of "clearly" is *clearly* broken
To use your own attitude against you, you'd have to be quite thick to not be able to comprehend the "dark side" comment was made in jest, in that original message.
On 16 October 2013 07:16, Tim ignored_mailbox@yahoo.com.au wrote:
Tim:
I *keep* on using *what* word?
Reindl Harald:
the word "clearly"?
I disagree. I've only participated in this thread about three or four times, by now. That's hardly cause for saying I "keep on" saying anything. Nor do I insist that something is clear in other threads. The other poster is confusing me with someone else.
Ironically, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." post (not from Reindl), is also originally a movie reference. So it's equally as 'clearly' humorous, I've no idea whether that subtext is intended though.
clearly, clearly is clearly unclear or all too clear, clearly. I loved the Princess Bride reference. Can we please get on to topic. Roger
On 16 October 2013 07:16, Tim ignored_mailbox@yahoo.com.au wrote:
Tim:
I *keep* on using *what* word?
Reindl Harald:
the word "clearly"?
I disagree. I've only participated in this thread about three or four times, by now. That's hardly cause for saying I "keep on" saying anything. Nor do I insist that something is clear in other threads. The other poster is confusing me with someone else.
Ironically, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." post (not from Reindl), is also originally a movie reference. So it's equally as 'clearly' humorous, I've no idea whether that subtext is intended though.
Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.10.2013 12:40, schrieb Tim:
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.
that must be why RHEL/CentOS has a lifespan of 10 years
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.
they also did not
otherwise they would not write bullshit like they are happy about 5 years support while Redhat has 10 years and a extended support of 13 years
https://www.google.at/search?q=rhel+lifecycle and click on the first link https://access.redhat.com/site/support/policy/updates/errata/
no idea why people who can't use Google all the time spread FUD
if you already came from a Debian background, Ubuntu is a closer move than a Red Hat styled release.
which has *nothing* to do with "the darker side of the Internet" it's a matter of expierience and qualification
There are a lot of people who don't want "experience and qualifications," they want to use the computer. I really find Mint is the ideal OS for them, rather than Fedora.
Am 18.10.2013 19:56, schrieb Bill Davidsen:
Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.10.2013 12:40, schrieb Tim:
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.
that must be why RHEL/CentOS has a lifespan of 10 years
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.
they also did not
otherwise they would not write bullshit like they are happy about 5 years support while Redhat has 10 years and a extended support of 13 years
https://www.google.at/search?q=rhel+lifecycle and click on the first link https://access.redhat.com/site/support/policy/updates/errata/
no idea why people who can't use Google all the time spread FUD
if you already came from a Debian background, Ubuntu is a closer move than a Red Hat styled release.
which has *nothing* to do with "the darker side of the Internet" it's a matter of expierience and qualification
There are a lot of people who don't want "experience and qualifications," they want to use the computer. I really find Mint is the ideal OS for them, rather than Fedora.
people who are not interested in experience and qualifications are *not* forced to use a distribution with 2 major upgrades each year and i always wonder if poeple (like you stating you have still running FC6 and FC13 somewhere) are spent one minute to thunk what they are doing *before* they install whatever OS
On 10/19/2013 05:00 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
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.
that must be why RHEL/CentOS has a lifespan of 10 years
Admittedly I am a novice in much of the reasoning about version changes but have long wondered why they bother when much of the new version could be just another update. Golly we update kernels and core apps with regularity. When it gets serious like moving from ext4 to btrfs or what ever it's called, now that would require version change but most version changes so far seem to be just updates. I have no wish to create a flame war or cop derogatory comment, my few cents worth is based on observation not study of code. Roger
Am 19.10.2013 01:03, schrieb Roger:
On 10/19/2013 05:00 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
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.
that must be why RHEL/CentOS has a lifespan of 10 years
Admittedly I am a novice in much of the reasoning about version changes but have long wondered why they bother when much of the new version could be just another update. Golly we update kernels and core apps with regularity. When it gets serious like moving from ext4 to btrfs or what ever it's called, now that would require version change but most version changes so far seem to be just updates. I have no wish to create a flame war or cop derogatory comment, my few cents worth is based on observation not study of code.
and that is why different distributions exists but also on Fedora no update will ever change for filesystem
* if you want no abusive changes but security updates and bugfixes use RHEL/CentOS * if you want a recent system with all drawbacks use Fedora
and that is why i call the article idiocity: they mix Fedora and RHEL
On Sat, 19 Oct 2013 10:03:00 +1100 Roger arelem@bigpond.com wrote:
On 10/19/2013 05:00 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
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.
that must be why RHEL/CentOS has a lifespan of 10 years
Admittedly I am a novice in much of the reasoning about version changes but have long wondered why they bother when much of the new version could be just another update. Golly we update kernels and core apps with regularity. When it gets serious like moving from ext4 to btrfs or what ever it's called, now that would require version change but most version changes so far seem to be just updates. I have no wish to create a flame war or cop derogatory comment, my few cents worth is based on observation not study of code. Roger
I have long been a (quiet) advocate of this approach -- the so-called rolling release model. The stock response has usually been: try the bleeding-edge rawhide, which I do not think is equivalent to have a leading-edge rolling release model.
Maybe one option could be to have a Fedora version for the rolling release to run in parallel with Fedora. Call it Topi or some other hat. Then, there would be the enterprise-level Redhat, the short-term release-based Fedora and the never-ending-release-called-whatever-hat. Of course, not sure whether this could be a practical approach.
One other issue is that it sure would be nice if one could install portions of the kernel without rebooting the machine: would be very helpful for machines which are desirable to run without rebooting for months.
Ranjan
____________________________________________________________ FREE 3D EARTH SCREENSAVER - Watch the Earth right on your desktop! Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth
On 11 October 2013 11:40, Tim ignored_mailbox@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.
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:24:40 +0100 Ian Malone wrote:
Ubuntu is increasingly being customised away from Debian.
Yep. In fact if I wanted to pick something to point at as the "dark side" I'd take the Ubuntu unity desktop as the worst example of utter awfulness anywhere in linux.
Gnome 3 is working hard to catch up, but even it has a long way to go before reaching the depth that unity has sunk to.
On Friday, October 11, 2013 07:31:32 AM Tom Horsley wrote:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:24:40 +0100
Ian Malone wrote:
Ubuntu is increasingly being customised away from Debian.
Yep. In fact if I wanted to pick something to point at as the "dark side" I'd take the Ubuntu unity desktop as the worst example of utter awfulness anywhere in linux.
If people keep up this Unity bashing I'll need to go look at it soon. Is it on the Ubuntu LiveCD?
Such a long thread about something that was clearly a joke ...
/m.
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:24:40 +0100 Ian Malone wrote:
Ubuntu is increasingly being customised away from Debian.
Yep. In fact if I wanted to pick something to point at as the "dark side" I'd take the Ubuntu unity desktop as the worst example of utter awfulness anywhere in linux.
Gnome 3 is working hard to catch up, but even it has a long way to go before reaching the depth that unity has sunk to.
GNOME3 is a badly written video game, hard to play, little benefit to experience, and no treasure anywhere.
Tim 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 if you already came from a Debian background, Ubuntu is a closer move than a Red Hat styled release.
I would love to have just security bug fix on the system software for an extra year. I'm still running FC13, FC6 and RH8 in virtual machines because there are apps which are useful. Bless kvm.
-
Bill Davidsen -
Fernando Cassia -
Ian Malone -
itamar -
Jeff Gustafson -
linux.whiz＠gmail.com -
Martin S -
Matthew Miller -
Michael Hennebry -
Ranjan Maitra -
Reindl Harald -
Roger -
Stephen Gallagher -
SternData -
Tim -
Tom Horsley -
William Oliver