| |||||||||||||
Contingency plans?Contingency plans?Posted Nov 10, 2012 4:49 UTC (Sat) by brouhaha (subscriber, #1698)In reply to: Contingency plans? by hadrons123 Parent article: Fedora 18 now scheduled for January 2013 Fedora already has a rolling release. It's called rawhide. If you don't like time-based releases, use rawhide. Don't try to take away time-based releases from those of us that want them.
(Log in to post comments)
Contingency plans? Posted Nov 10, 2012 5:05 UTC (Sat) by hadrons123 (guest, #72126) [Link]
But rawhide is just unusable. Its broken 95% of the times. My point is fedora cannot be "first" if it continue to have this release schedules and things that are holding the releases back.
The obsolete packages in Fedora shall grow more and more if it continue to have this schedules.
How can it be a leader if it releases packages later than another distro?
Anyway, congratulations to the ArchLinux folks. Their upstream work is fantastic. We love you guys![/quote]
Contingency plans? Posted Nov 10, 2012 18:09 UTC (Sat) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link]
I couldn't agree with you more. A Fedora install is unnecessarily disruptive, and once the new release is installed a very desirable 'yum update' will pull in lots of packages. Why not skip the six month reinstall phase and simply go rolling? Update Anaconda every so often so it keeps up with the state of the distro, and keep good documentation for dealing with disruptive changes.
Contingency plans? Posted Nov 11, 2012 22:48 UTC (Sun) by jondkent (guest, #19595) [Link]
Sort of agree too. Not completely sold on rolling, but if they can get fedup working that'll fix my use case as I'm tied of 'install-use-blow away & reinstall' cycle. No real reason for this much anymore.
If the, far too short, 6 month major release could be thrown in the bin and replace with, say, a major once a year, via fedup if you want, and minor release during the year cycle to rebase the build tree, that'll be a step forward.
Re anaconda, I don't fully understand why Red Hat are so worked up about this. I look after lots of rhel servers at work and use kickstart for these. Can't remember the last time I used anaconda to install rhel.
Contingency plans? Posted Nov 13, 2012 7:20 UTC (Tue) by brouhaha (subscriber, #1698) [Link] And what makes you believe that something actually named as a "rolling release" would be more stable than Fedora, which is a rolling release that doesn't happen to be called that?I can certainly understand the desire to have both stability and the latest and greatest stuff, but there's not actually a way to have both.
Contingency plans? Posted Nov 14, 2012 15:13 UTC (Wed) by hadrons123 (guest, #72126) [Link]
I am not sure what you mean by stable.
AFAIK, The term "stable" refers more to the fact that the codebase itself doesn't have major changes made to it.
But fedora updates to the latest version including the kernel, So it totally negates any kind of stability whatsoever.
Fedora 18 already have around 10000 package updates, even before the beta is released. What is the point of having old packages getting released on january 2013 when you are anyway going to update to the latest version.
I use archlinux and Fedora in my systems and never found Arch crash becoz of some software upgrade. It always has been smooth. Its no way inferior to Fedora.
If anyone tries to use fedora on their production servers they obviously need some education on how to handle servers.
Contingency plans? Posted Nov 25, 2012 20:42 UTC (Sun) by rwmj (subscriber, #5474) [Link]
Rawhide is mostly fine, particularly if you stick to non-GUI server-ish packages. I know this because I use Rawhide on my laptop [except right now, because I'm testing F18, but I'll flip back to Rawhide once F18 is out]. I also have numerous Rawhide VMs for testing, and for libguestfs we do an all-up test of a Rawhide VM every few days.
|
|||||||||||||