| |||||||||||||
On properly packaging perlOn properly packaging perlPosted Aug 21, 2009 21:55 UTC (Fri) by Baylink (subscriber, #755)In reply to: On properly packaging perl by spot Parent article: On properly packaging perl
I'd always had the impression that Fedora was supposed to be treated as a test sandbox for Red Hat, not something you depended on for Real Work.
Did *that* change while I wasn't looking, too? Damn. :-)
(Log in to post comments)
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 21, 2009 22:06 UTC (Fri) by dowdle (subscriber, #659) [Link]
Depends on what you call "real work". Is desktop use real work? Fedora is my preferred distro for desktop usage because I like the bleeding edge stuff, don't mind the constant stream of updates, and don't mind occasional (almost always only minor) breakage. Makes me check bugzilla more often and contribute. :)
I don't often run Fedora on servers (or server virtual machines / containers) unless I have a need for something newer than RHEL5/CentOS5 and that isn't very often.
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 21, 2009 22:21 UTC (Fri) by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331) [Link] I don't often run Fedora on servers (or server virtual machines / containers) unless I have a need for something newer than RHEL5/CentOS5 and that isn't very often.I regularly backport Fedora packages to RHEL when I need a newer version of a particular program or library. It works wonderfully (though of course, I have to manually monitor security lists for that package from that point onward.)
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 23, 2009 19:41 UTC (Sun) by mmahut (guest, #45550) [Link]
What about EPEL?
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 23, 2009 19:44 UTC (Sun) by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331) [Link]
EPEL is great, but doesn't have everything. For example, the RHEL5 version of sudo spits out an infuriating error message if auditing is not available; the bug is fixed in the Fedora 11 version, which builds and runs fine on a RHEL5 machine.
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 24, 2009 14:18 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
Just to clarify, EPEL is a add-on repository and by policy, wouldn't have updated versions of sudo since that would conflict or override packages in the base OS. What it would have instead, is packages not available in RHEL.
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 21, 2009 23:57 UTC (Fri) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]
This was roughly what I was talking about, yes. When they blew it on 8, and then decided to go commercial with 9, I switched to SuSE, and I now use it for everything. Except Zimbra. They don't support it commercially, so I use CentOS 5 and lie.
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 21, 2009 22:06 UTC (Fri) by smoogen (subscriber, #97) [Link]
It is in the same way Debian is the test sandbox for Ubuntu (or vice versa)... :) :)
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 21, 2009 23:03 UTC (Fri) by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955) [Link]
Debian unstable is the test sandbox for Debian and Ubuntu releases.
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 22, 2009 5:28 UTC (Sat) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
and like Fedora it makes a kick-ass workstation/desktop OS.
It's just something that won't ever be mainstream and is dubious for production environment.
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 22, 2009 8:03 UTC (Sat) by yoe (subscriber, #25743) [Link]
You are aware that Debian is used on 80.000 systems in the Extramadura region in Spain, right?
You are aware that Debian is used on several thousand systems in Munich too, right?
You are aware that the servers of Second Life all run Debian, right?
These are just the three first examples I could come up with off the top of my head. They all sound pretty 'mainstream' and 'production' to me.
I'm not saying Debian Rulez the World, but saying "won't ever be mainstream and is dubious for production" is just trolling.
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 22, 2009 8:13 UTC (Sat) by xanni (subscriber, #361) [Link]
Did you miss the word "unstable" after "Debian"?
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 29, 2009 18:55 UTC (Sat) by dirtyepic (subscriber, #30178) [Link]
sssh. he's busy aggrandizing.
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 22, 2009 8:15 UTC (Sat) by Sho (subscriber, #8956) [Link]
He meant Debian's *unstable* branch, afaict.
|
|||||||||||||