5 ms·

I tend to agree with all that. My first Linux was Redhat 5.1 (not RHEL), but I ended up switching to Debian Slink and OpenBSD for whatever reason. Since then I

by antod 11y ago

I tend to agree with all that. My first Linux was Redhat 5.1 (not RHEL), but I ended up switching to Debian Slink and OpenBSD for whatever reason. Since then I just personally find Redhat based distros a bit wierd or clunky (based on lack of familiarity), and prefer to stick with the Debian/Ubuntu side of the fence. Reason to prefer Ubuntu LTS over Debian Stable: fixed 5yr support period instead of a variable period. Reason to prefer Debian Stable over Ubuntu LTS: all packages in repo are in the same security patching regime. With Ubuntu you have to be a bit careful using packages from Universe or Metaverse.

jerrac 11y ago
I did not know Debian didn't have fixed lifetimes for Stable. Though they do have some form of LTS. [0] I do find it odd that the Debian Security team doesn't manage it. Part of my RedHat dislike is unfamiliarity. But when I sit down and think about why I prefer how Ubuntu does something vs. how CentOS does something, I usually find Ubuntu methods make more sense. For example, how the default apache mods are enabled. Ubuntu has the mods-enabled directory. CentOS has the LoadModule lines and mod config in httpd.conf. So to disable an unneeded module, you have to find the LoadModule lines, remove them, and the find all the various default config that is now broken. In Ubuntu, you just remove the symlinks in mods-enabled. [0] https://wiki.debian.org/LTS https://wiki.debian.org/LTS
- antod 11y ago
  A new Debian Stable comes out when it is ready - after a long freeze. Originally (from memory) Debian stable was only supported until the next stable release which could be anywhere from 18-36 months later (release timeframes seem more consistent these days). Then they started supporting an oldstable (the previous stable release) for an extra 1yr timeframe. Debian LTS is a newer initiative, but it doesn't quite have the same security service level as say Debian Stable. Not all patches make it to LTS, and those that do arrive noticeably later. Debian is trying to find ways to improve this though.

by antod 11y ago

jerrac 11y ago

I did not know Debian didn't have fixed lifetimes for Stable. Though they do have some form of LTS. [0] I do find it odd that the Debian Security team doesn't manage it. Part of my RedHat dislike is unfamiliarity. But when I sit down and think about why I prefer how Ubuntu does something vs. how CentOS does something, I usually find Ubuntu methods make more sense. For example, how the default apache mods are enabled. Ubuntu has the mods-enabled directory. CentOS has the LoadModule lines and mod config in httpd.conf. So to disable an unneeded module, you have to find the LoadModule lines, remove them, and the find all the various default config that is now broken. In Ubuntu, you just remove the symlinks in mods-enabled. [0] https://wiki.debian.org/LTS https://wiki.debian.org/LTS

antod 11y ago
A new Debian Stable comes out when it is ready - after a long freeze. Originally (from memory) Debian stable was only supported until the next stable release which could be anywhere from 18-36 months later (release timeframes seem more consistent these days). Then they started supporting an oldstable (the previous stable release) for an extra 1yr timeframe. Debian LTS is a newer initiative, but it doesn't quite have the same security service level as say Debian Stable. Not all patches make it to LTS, and those that do arrive noticeably later. Debian is trying to find ways to improve this though.