5 ms·
I've known people in authority positions who have insisted on CentOS because "red hat certification", "tested for enterprise" etc, whose first setup step is to
by tehwalrus 9y ago
I've known people in authority positions who have insisted on CentOS because "red hat certification", "tested for enterprise" etc, whose first setup step is to enable EPEL and a bunch of 3rd party repos.
They don't seem to see how this negates the advantage of using a "well tested, enterprise grade" distro!
I much prefer Debian (for servers and development machines) as a good intersection between "up to date" and "stable".
- tormeh 9y agoWell, epel has extra packages. They are by definition not essential to the functioning of the OS. Why you wouldn't want those from a rapidly updating or rolling-release repo is something I don't understand.
- tehwalrus 9y agoEPEL not being enabled by default I find a little weird, but sure it's not the end of the world. The thing I find strange is that the people I'm talking about will happily run code from random 3rd party repos (providing PHP 7.0 or similar), and copy/paste repo key fingerprints from the web without blinking, while steadfastly refusing to use an OS with such packages included and tested in the official repos "because security/quality/enterprise".
- lima 9y agoAgreed on the third party repos, but EPEL is fine. Fedora/EPEL, while unsupported, is a Red Hat project. It's basically the upstream release for RHEL, and many Red Hat employees contribute. They have a really good QA process too.