4 ms·
Just to clarify, these complaints are primarily about Fedora specifically -- at least in my experience RHEL (and CentOS) have been very solid. I just wish that
by derekp7 7y ago
Just to clarify, these complaints are primarily about Fedora specifically -- at least in my experience RHEL (and CentOS) have been very solid. I just wish that Fedora had a model similar to Ubuntu, where periodic releases are targeted for longer term support (i.e., get patches for 2 - 3 years), and all the potentially breaking items go into the inbetween releases.
- hdfbdtbcdg 7y agoI think that is RHEL and CentOs. Fedora is their experimental playground for beta testing. RHEL is their LTS.
- unilynx 7y agoThe biggest difference is probably that they seem to take a 'older' Fedora, and then stabilize it a bit before blessing it as the new RHEL, where Ubuntu just forks off the LTS from their regular release (and where a lot of people seem to wait for the .1 release of the LTS before actually using it)
- hdfbdtbcdg 7y agoAlso not everything makes it from Fedora into RHEL.
- freedomben 7y agoThis is true, but the vast majority does (if you use EPEL and RPM Fusion). I've also had pretty good luck using Fedora rpms from the same era. Gotta stay on top of CVEs tho so you don't end up running a vulnerable application.