[CentOS] General question on QA from a Fedora Core fan

Fri Apr 29 01:49:30 UTC 2005
Collins Richey <crichey at gmail.com>

On 4/28/05, Hardy Beltran Monasterios <hardy at hardy.com.bo> wrote:
> El jue, 28-04-2005 a las 15:42 -0500, Steve Bergman escribió:
> > Apologies if this ends up a dup, but there seems to have been a problem
> > with my original subscription.
> >
> > [ snip ]
> >
> > On the positive side, looking at the errata, it looks as though CentOS
> > has drastically fewer notices than Fedora, and I assume that is because
> > there really are more problems (security of otherwise) shaken out during
> > testing.
> >
> > Obviously, not being forced to upgrade due to withdrawal of support with
> > regards to security patches every 1.5 years is a plus.
> >
> > So I welcome comments.  If I switch my clients from Fedora to CentOS,
> > they don't have the latest and greatest  (and, for example,  I need
> > OpenOffice 2.0 ASAP for one of my clients due to it's Access-like
> > interface to PostgreSQL), but how much advantage am I really looking at
> > with regards to stability?
> >

In the case of OO, you can just download directly from the OO sites.
I've been running the 2.0 Beta since released, and it certainly hasn't
added any instability to my system.

> It depedens what do you want to do, what do you need. There is no distro
> for all tasks.
> In my particular case I prefer to use CentOS in the side server for
> their stability and more importan for me, the long support that this
> Enterprise class distro offer (by RH promess).
> For my clients wich uses Linux in the side server my recomendations are
> the same. And by example I have a customer wich develops applications
> with PHP/Postgress/MySQL they can't afford the costly effort to upgrade
> his development/production/test servers and the worst case test his
> application with the new version of PHP and MySQL which we see in Fedora
> in almost each release. For them the "version stability" is a very
> critical issue.
> But I tink that CentOS is not very useful in the desktop side, where we
> need each time use recent version of the applications. I think in the
> desktop side is not much important "version estability/freeze".
> My self I use Debian for my desktop and CentOS for my servers. With
> Debian always can I get the newer "killer app" for Gnome.

What would be really great would be an intermediate level solution -
the stability of the RHEL/CentOS base with available updates for KDE /
GNOME / GIMP / PHP / MYSQL / POSTGRES etc. compiled on that base for
those who want more current apps on the desktop or for development.
And that with something considerably less experimental than the
all-or-nothing FCn releases.

Yes, I'm dreaming.

       When I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, 
       it was the start of a new Arab world.... The Berlin Wall has fallen. 
               - Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt