[CentOS] Redhat vs centos vs ubuntu

Fri Nov 11 01:40:22 UTC 2011
Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com>

On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 14:30 -0500, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Thursday, November 10, 2011 02:20:25 PM Bob Hoffman wrote:
> > The newer stuff is cool, but it lacks the polish of a ready to go 
> > system. Centos has the polish, but lacks the new stuff.
> > sigh.
> And right there is the core (or maybe it's 'sore') point to all of this; it really depends on what you need and how much work you have to do to make it fit your needs.  And then keeping up with your needs, as they inevitably change.
> CentOS is what it is: as close as possible to upstream EL without being upstream EL.  Nothing more, nothing less, and bug-for-bug compatible.  If that's not what you need, then CentOS won't meet your need.

May 19, 2011 (RH 6.1)

I thought the term 'close' only applied to horseshoes and hand grenades.

Given the track record for CentOS for v 6, it's pretty clear that
installing it means that you are likely to have deployed servers that
will lag for months without security updates and it's awful easy to set
up iptables  ;-)  I'm not saying this to disparage the developers
because I'm sure that they're doing the best that they can but I can't
tell my friends/clients/employer/etc. that I can recommend using CentOS
knowing the struggles they are having getting out releases & updates.


This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.