Fedora Makes a Terrible Server?

[John Summerfield]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> John Summerfield wrote:
>> Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Tim Alberts <talberts at msiscales.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>>  Honestly I feel like a backstabber by using CentOS because I've been
>>>>  with Fedora since before Fedora (RedHat 5.1 was my first Linux
>>>>  experience), and using CentOS is reaping the benefits with no 
>>>> contribution.
>>>
>>> You realize that technically speaking Redhat|Centos are infact Fedora,
>>> albeit mature versions of it.
>>>
>>
>> Not really. The testing that goes into RHEL is quite different.
> 
> And yet there are packages in RHEL5 that weren't rebuilt from their FC6 
> versions...
> 
I'm not sure that's so[1], but if it is, so what?

It's the _distro_ testing that is the key difference. RH is betting its 
future on its RHEL releases. Problems with Fedora are trivially 
important in comparison (and arguably not RH's problems at all).


[1] I've seen EL packages that seem to be FC packages, but that might 
mean no more than the same spec file and that the spec file is not 
sensitive to the build environment. THis, for example, will look like a 
RHEL package even if built on Fedora:
  Name: fedora-ds
  Version: 1.0
  Release: 2.RHEL4
while some others expand %{dist} like so:
  Release: 2%{?dist}



-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu  Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

You cannot reply off-list:-)