On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Nikolaos Milas <nmilas at noa.gr> wrote: >>> >> There is no such thing as a 100% reliable system if you don't do things >> right. You can easily screw (in terms of security and reliability) your >> Vanilla RHEL/CentOS with one wrong setting, even using your safe repos. >> > > Breaking it yourself is a different issue than installing conflicting > things from uncoordinated repositories though. The underlying problem > is that using newer packages often requires replacing core libraries. > Any single 3rd party repo doing this will probably test things > together, but if you combine 2 or more of these you are mixing > untested code, likely to have had different compile options, etc. > This seems especially bad in the RH/CentOS world because the core > repos and epel have very restrictive policies on what can be there and > the 3rd party repos are intentionally uncoordinated. I think the > debian/Ubuntu world has many more packages in at least loosely > coordinated repos. You can still run into problems but you are less > likely to be the first person to every mix a particular set of > packages in an install. > Les Mikesell >From what i have seen of fedora and centos in the rpm world the repos are very much better in the debian world. To me the stability comes from the distro and it's repos. Not being able to install Abiword or yumex, having to spend time selecting options for repos to me simply isn't worth it. I've just installed a Slackware distro today and it's the best i've ever tried in 6 years of using linux. It's speed, ease of installation put's it in a league of its own. Or as their 'chilling warning goes' Once you go Slack... you never go back! james