Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de> wrote:
On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 10:50 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
[...]
> What earthly reason would you have to run some old code set,
with not
> even close to guaranteed updates, let alone timely ones, with little
> man power behind it, and the opportunity to be ignored by most package
> owners?
Because that's still better and more effective than getting lost
in the
Fedora upgrade maelstrom
OK, that can be an issue.
and getting lost in the bureaucracy Fedora
suffers from
Examples? Suggestions to streamline?
and better than continuing to use a completely
discontinued
distro.
CentOS isn't "completely discontinued"...
> And why aren't those reasons satisfied with RHEL/CentOS
which doesn't
> have these problems?
For me, CentOS is an ultra conservative, stagnating distro not
meeting
my demands. It may-be suitable for those who want to set up a server and
run it with minimal support for the next 4 years - To me it's non
interesting.
So you want bleeding-edge packages, ultra-conservative distribution
version?
Perhaps Debian unstable, with its rolling updates (and never, ever a new
version) is what you are looking for?
--
Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616
counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 2654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 2654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 2797513