Scott Silva wrote:
>>
>> I have always wanted a distro in-between long term support and cutting
>> edge.
>>
>> Say one that uses the kernel/command line part of a long term distro
>> and the gui and gui apps of a cutting edge distro (maybe 1 back from
>> the cutting edge).
>>
>> An kernel upgrade cycle of say 3 years, but a GUI that stays current
>> within it's release.
>
> Current within the Distro's release, or current to the GUI's release?
> Cutting edge is sort of the middle. On both sides you have bleeding edge
> and Enterprise stable. Then on the bottom you have stale and locked
At least with Centos getting a fairly current firefox and OOo in the 5.2
update things aren't quite as stale on the desktop as usual.
> I think the API's and ABI's change radically in the two mainstream GUI's
> (Gnome and KDE). It would be a juggling act to balance their upgrades
> and the re-compile and re-download of all the binaries that hook into
> them. I think Gentoo is much closer to this then anything else, but if
> you leave a system too long, they can get so out of sync that they won't
> upgrade through portage anymore. But Gentoo upgrades the kernel along
> with everything else.
Couldn't it be mostly-automated to build a just slightly outdated fedora
desktop (everything that depends on the KDE or GNOME libs) on top of an
otherwise stock Centos?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com