3 ms·

I think it can be a problem of many Debian-based distributions, which are quite often supplying very old packages. RPM-based distributions are usually providing

by xvilka 8y ago

I think it can be a problem of many Debian-based distributions, which are quite often supplying very old packages. RPM-based distributions are usually providing more updated software and perform updates more often. My personal favorites are Gentoo (for fun), Arch (for VMs) and Fedora (for work). They all are have an active and striving developers' community , except Gentoo which suffers from developers shortage. But if I fill a bug in existing package in these distributions, I am sure it will not be in vain.

simion314 8y ago
Sure if you ignore CentoOS and RedHat. The problem is that people that use Linux for work do not want o update the work machine daily, if there is no backup machine probably people like me will use an LTS for 3-5 years. Since I use some older package and report a bug the upstream developers will most of the time ask to check the latest version and probably I can't have access to that package, In case you would made the ar5gument that Arch is better and it never broke for you , even in a perfect world with no bugs you have the new features that roll out and that can break your workflow when useful things you used are removed or changed(if you use GNOME and you do not read on it's development I imagine how surprised people are when shit is removed or moved around every release)
alxlaz 8y ago
Rolling-release distributions (Gentoo, Arch) are very hard to use in a work environment. When it's the last day before release and I have two bugs to squash and eight hours for it, the last thing I want to do is babysit my computer through whatever broke at the last update. Fedora is the same, except the breakage happens every six months. No thanks. I'm happy to run these in a VM for development, or at home, but not at work, the place where I have absolutely zero intention of spending more than the fixed daily amount in my contract.
HeadsUpHigh 8y ago
I've never had any luck reporting bugs on fedora.

by xvilka 8y ago

simion314 8y ago

Sure if you ignore CentoOS and RedHat. The problem is that people that use Linux for work do not want o update the work machine daily, if there is no backup machine probably people like me will use an LTS for 3-5 years. Since I use some older package and report a bug the upstream developers will most of the time ask to check the latest version and probably I can't have access to that package, In case you would made the ar5gument that Arch is better and it never broke for you , even in a perfect world with no bugs you have the new features that roll out and that can break your workflow when useful things you used are removed or changed(if you use GNOME and you do not read on it's development I imagine how surprised people are when shit is removed or moved around every release)

alxlaz 8y ago

Rolling-release distributions (Gentoo, Arch) are very hard to use in a work environment. When it's the last day before release and I have two bugs to squash and eight hours for it, the last thing I want to do is babysit my computer through whatever broke at the last update. Fedora is the same, except the breakage happens every six months. No thanks. I'm happy to run these in a VM for development, or at home, but not at work, the place where I have absolutely zero intention of spending more than the fixed daily amount in my contract.

HeadsUpHigh 8y ago

I've never had any luck reporting bugs on fedora.