An empty legacy

Posted Oct 19, 2006 14:48 UTC (Thu) by kh (guest, #19413)
In reply to: An empty legacy by bojan
Parent article: An empty legacy

I wonder how many have switched to Ubuntu. Even for my desktop systems, I don't want updates every 6 months - I did at one time but most software I care about has matured to the point that the (non security) upgrades don't seem so important anymore.

An empty legacy

Posted Oct 19, 2006 18:03 UTC (Thu) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link] (4 responses)

I know exactly one guy still using Fedora (and he's made noises about
switching but hates system administration so much he still hasn't really
looked at the alternatives). Everyone else is using Ubuntu or
occasionally Gentoo.

Rob

An empty legacy

Posted Oct 20, 2006 2:55 UTC (Fri) by skvidal (guest, #3094) [Link] (3 responses)

If you listened only to comments in lwn then you'd think everyone uses gentoo or ubuntu. Though, it's funny. For the last 2 weeks there have been large articles about fedora on the front page and they've garnered a lot of conversation about fedora. And the fedora community is ever-growing. And the download numbers and rates seem to be perpetually growing, as well.

For a distribution that a lot of commenters on lwn seem to think that "everyone is switching away from" it sures seems like a lot of people are using it and more people are participating all the time.

hmm..

An empty legacy

Posted Oct 20, 2006 4:53 UTC (Fri) by dberkholz (guest, #23346) [Link]

Big difference between the readers of LWN and the Linux user community as a whole...

An empty legacy

Posted Oct 20, 2006 9:44 UTC (Fri) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link]

I dropped Fedora because of the cavalier attitude that distro began to take with its users. The eternal upgrade treadmill simply became too much of a problem. I moved most of my clients to CentOS. But for some, CentOS is not appropriate. Ubuntu is more or less perfect for them. I had to learn the "Debian Way" of doing things. And I had to get over my dislike of the Debian family of Linux OSes. But it's been worth it.

That should give you a hint as to just how badly Fedora, for all the statements from various Fedora officials that they are out to prove that they are not just RH's beta, has handled things. (If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...)

If Fedora ever stopped treating FC+1-2 like a dead body they'd as soon be rid of, I would seriously consider moving some clients back to it.

An empty legacy

Posted Oct 20, 2006 15:31 UTC (Fri) by TxtEdMacs (guest, #5983) [Link]

Sorry downloads and actual, extended use are not closely coupled parameters.

Consider my case: I loaded Fedora Core 3 onto a laptop that previously contained a very broken version of Mandrak 9.1 Pro. I was astounded on the ease of installation and the effective updates. However, as the end of support approached I moved to a different machine that went through Debian Stable with mostly Testing and just a bit of Unstable for version 3.0. I was at my happiest and ignored Fedora my laptop. At the end of 2005 a distribution upgrade to Sarge 3.1 broke my system. I limped along until I did a distribution upgrade of a neglected Ubuntu 5.04 to 5.10 that was sitting on a second disc. Not too long afterward most of my bootups were into the Ubuntu. I kept Ubuntu current with security upgrades and did most of my work off this second disc.

This past Spring due to making a trip I did a quick upgrade of the laptop to Fedora Core 4 that was a disaster. I probably just used its minimal capabilities or I slapped on Ubuntu. I think it was the former, but I made some minimal use of the machine on the trip - just email and some internet browsing.

In the last few months I have downloaded and had a server running Fedora Core 4 then Fedora Core 5. However, let's review what I have actually running and in use at this time:

Desktop(s) Debian (unused) first disc waiting for new distribution, second disc: Ubuntu 5.10 most heavily used.

Laptop: Ubuntu Desktop 6.06, loaded in July very light use so far.

Server: Ubuntu Server 6.06, loaded late September has been running constantly, but mostly unattended.

Hence, while having downloaded recent versions of Fedora Core 4 and 5 I have found Ubuntu more appropriate to my needs. While I liked parts of Fedora other characteristics attracted me to stay with another distribution where longer term support for security fixes were of paramount importance.

Future plans? Debian gets replaced by 6.10, and the 5.10 goes to 6.06. Laptop will be used to test more risky software releases, e.g. Flash 9 and perhaps the minefield version of Firefox (a.k.a. upcoming version 3.0).

Therefore, I suggest you not read too much into downloads.

A Fedora User For the Long Haul

Posted Oct 26, 2006 7:45 UTC (Thu) by Pc5Y9sbv (guest, #41328) [Link] (3 responses)

I am still installing Fedora everywhere I go. I reluctantly switched to RedHat from Slackware a looong time ago (early to mid-90s) when I needed a version to run on a DEC Alpha and couldn't be bothered to simultaneously manage two different distributions on my Alpha versus my PC. Despite many frustrations with the way they try to make Linux behave like Windows, I've grown to appreciate the hard work they do too. And many of the faults actually lie in upstream sources, so I can only blame Fedora for including them...

I never believed in "upgrade" of Linux systems, but rather accepted a periodic reinstall while migrating my home directory data. However, with Fedora I recently discovered, during a business trip, my wife's laptop was running a very stale FC3 and I remotely upgraded it via yum FC3->FC4->FC5 to become fully up to date. (I did this so we could try using ekiga to chat internationally.)

It worked like a charm, right up until it ran out of disk space. However, even then I was able to recover it, clear some space, and finish the upgrade. Note to self: yum upgrade at one point has the old system, all the new downloaded packages, and potentially some of the new package files installed too, it would seem. Needs lots of disk space. I only had to manually search for some really old packages that were orphaned when yum fell over in the middle of a "delete and install" transaction. It is funny how they use the word transaction here...

So, I think it is reasonable to say a real "legacy" strategy for Fedora users is to wait until updates are tapped out in an old distribution, and then upgrade the system to the newer release+updates. By this time, the new release should have most of its bugs patched in the updates stream too. For people who really cannot take this risk of modernity, I agree they probably ought to be running a more conservative distribution like CentOS.

Ironically, the only real problem I've had recently was a bizarre heisenbug on a regular FC5 laptop (not one that had followed such a convoluted upgrade path). With the latest updates a few weeks ago, it began having oom-killer storms in the night correlated with the daily cron jobs. I could not resolve this, and eventually reinstalled from scratch. Problem disappeared. Searching the web gave few hints, and it seems people who encounter this have been using all different distributions and not just Fedora! Search hits are always to someone reporting the issue, getting no resolution, and solving it via frustrated reinstall.

A Fedora User For the Long Haul

Posted Oct 26, 2006 21:40 UTC (Thu) by at2000 (guest, #20920) [Link] (2 responses)

I sort of dislike this altitude of the RedHat camp. My oldest debian/ubuntu linux was installed around 6 years ago and has survived for 6 upgrades now (potato -> woody -> sarge -> hoary -> breezy -> dapper -> edgy). Other systems are also upgraded twice or so like this. To me, upgrades never fail, and more importantly, it has near zero downtime.

A Fedora User For the Long Haul

Posted Oct 27, 2006 3:48 UTC (Fri) by Pc5Y9sbv (guest, #41328) [Link]

Which attitude is that? I am saying the upgrade DID work, and would have had near zero downtime if I hadn't tried to do it to a system that was 98% full when I started.

This was a completely remote, network based upgrade by pointing yum at a mirror site, installing the new fedora-release package, running "yum upgrade", and then rebooting with the new kernel at the end. I did this via ssh... My extra grief was clearing some space and running "yum upgrade" again in the middle, following by a search through all packages sorted by install time to find a few orphans to delete.

My attitude about not trusting upgrades predates RedHat, and comes from my experience with Slackware, SLS, and older non-Linux environments...

Also, the problem with the oom-killer storms was reported also by Ubuntu and Debian users when I did a web search. It seems to be a very erratic bug, not tied to any particular distribution or kernel version.

Ubuntu is not free from troubles either

Posted Oct 29, 2006 14:50 UTC (Sun) by dag- (guest, #30207) [Link]

I am disappointed that some people, like you, feel the need to polarize the community. All distributions have problems with supporting seamless upgrades between releases. It may have worked in your case, but that doesn't mean that it works for everybody. (Just like if it breaks for one person it doesn't fail for all users).

The irony is that on slashdot the following article appeared:

Upgrading to Ubuntu Edgy Eft a "Nightmare"
http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/06/10/28/239258.shtml

So it's not an isolated problem with Fedora. Fact is that it is easy to do reinstallations to test a products consistency, but it is much harder to test upgrades and reiterate over the same upgrade (for all the different systems that exist). Once a system is upgraded (with all its problems) you loose the original system to debug and fix it.

An Enterprise Linux distribution is what you need if you want to be free of upgrade problems. Long support and non-disruptive changes is what 99.99% of the people need. Go with CentOS or Ubuntu LTS instead.

Stop polarizing the community and take a step back. Red Hat is improving Ubuntu indirectly, and vice versa. Killing diversity is killing the community.