4 ms·

I said "a little" - Fedora is still more aggressive with updates than Ubuntu or Debian. Just slightly less than Arch. The most important libraries for Steam ar

I said "a little" - Fedora is still more aggressive with updates than Ubuntu or Debian. Just slightly less than Arch. The most important libraries for Steam are things like Mesa, which Fedora updates on a rolling basis along with the kernel.

flatiron 5y ago
fedora will also patch stuff from upstream to include in their distro. for better or worse arch will try to upstream the patch and if they don't like it just keep an older version around if they don't accept it
- dralley 5y ago
  Both Fedora and Arch share that philosophy, though. There are very very few patches in Fedora compared to the Debian ecosystem - and often the only exceptions are support for features that in the process of being upstreamed, like Firefox' hardware acceleration support that was added by a Red Hat engineer.
  - prg318 5y ago
    This is not always true. Fedora maintains over 100 RedHat exclusive patches for grub2 alone: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/grub2/tree/rawhide https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/grub2/tree/rawhide Some of these are pretty questionable, particularly disabling the use of "grub-install" on UEFI systems (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917213 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917213)
boomboomsubban 5y ago
I don't know a ton about this, but I thought their major issue was games needing new versions of some random libraries. Being more up to date than Debian would still put you (presumably) years behind. Mesa and the kernel would be less important, as all the hardware needs to be supported by them on release.
- dralley 5y ago
  > I don't know a ton about this, but I thought their major issue was games needing new versions of some random libraries. Being more up to date than Debian would still put you (presumably) years behind. That's not the case w/ the Fedora release cycle. Like I said, it's only slightly behind Arch.

flatiron 5y ago

fedora will also patch stuff from upstream to include in their distro. for better or worse arch will try to upstream the patch and if they don't like it just keep an older version around if they don't accept it

dralley 5y ago
Both Fedora and Arch share that philosophy, though. There are very very few patches in Fedora compared to the Debian ecosystem - and often the only exceptions are support for features that in the process of being upstreamed, like Firefox' hardware acceleration support that was added by a Red Hat engineer.
- prg318 5y ago
  This is not always true. Fedora maintains over 100 RedHat exclusive patches for grub2 alone: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/grub2/tree/rawhide https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/grub2/tree/rawhide Some of these are pretty questionable, particularly disabling the use of "grub-install" on UEFI systems (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917213 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917213)

boomboomsubban 5y ago

I don't know a ton about this, but I thought their major issue was games needing new versions of some random libraries. Being more up to date than Debian would still put you (presumably) years behind. Mesa and the kernel would be less important, as all the hardware needs to be supported by them on release.

dralley 5y ago
> I don't know a ton about this, but I thought their major issue was games needing new versions of some random libraries. Being more up to date than Debian would still put you (presumably) years behind. That's not the case w/ the Fedora release cycle. Like I said, it's only slightly behind Arch.