5 ms·

What's advantage of Fedora over something like Arch?

by wooque 5y ago

schmorptron 5y ago
Easy installation, tested packages, a lot of proprietary software comes as rpms but not arch packages
kunagi7 5y ago
First of all, I used to be a Fedora user. The experience most of the time was excellent. Updating was a breeze and via external repos most packages were readily available. Most desktops/spins are well supported like sway, i3, xfce. Nowadays I use Arch which I also think it's a great distro. The only thing I miss are delta RPMs. Also, since CentOS was shut down, Fedora is a good way to learn how Red Hat based distros internals work.
- silverfox17 5y ago
  CentOS wasn't "shut down"... it's still out there, just as CentOS Stream now. The changes for most users are minimal to not even noticeable.
  - smarx007 5y ago
    And there is Rocky Linux for the rest.
    - ollien 5y ago
      I've heard great things about Alma
  - JohnTHaller 5y ago
    CentOS Linux is end of life at the end of this year, so in that respect, it was shut down: https://www.centos.org/cl-vs-cs/ https://www.centos.org/cl-vs-cs/ CentOS Stream isn't geared towards production environments according to the CentOS website.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
    CentOS most certainly was shut down, and replaced with CentOS Stream, which is a similar product that went from at least as stable as RHEL and not having ABI breakage, to the beta for the next RHEL and having ABI breakage. Close enough for many uses, but not the same thing.
    - mroche 5y ago
      > went from at least as stable as RHEL and not having ABI breakage, to the beta for the next RHEL and having ABI breakage. Please review the following resources before making statements about RHEL ABI compatibility in Stream: --- RHEL ABI: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility RHEL Kernel ABI: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/444773 https://access.redhat.com/solutions/444773 Kernel Sources (Module.kabi_<arch>): - RHEL 9: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/kernel - RHEL 8: https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/blob/c8s/f/SOURCES Pat Riehecky - Thinking About Binary Compatibility and CentOS Stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZuvoVau-0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZuvoVau-0 --- As a future version of RHEL, CentOS Stream is bound by the RHEL Application Compatibility Guidelines and kABI stablelist. I'll say it again: CentOS Stream is bound by the RHEL Application Compatibility Guidelines and kABI stablelist. All packages that exist in Stream repos have passed the same internal gating test suites that RHEL has. I'm sorry if this comes off as rough but it is very annoying seeing this "ABI incompatibility" statement be thrown around constantly without people fully understanding what it actually means in the context of RHEL. It is _not_ an all-encompassing policy that applies to the every part of the distribution the same like it would be implied for a library strictly following semver. There are levels and nuance, and some packages don't even make the list (which is why there are packages without a -devel subpackage). It is okay to say that Stream may not be bug-for-bug identical to released versions of RHEL, but it will be ABI compatible.
      - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
        I was thinking specifically in the context of ZFS, which break on minor releases because kernel-internal symbols are not fully stable (unless I've seriously misunderstood https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/11320 https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/11320). And since Stream is a rolling release, users will therefore experience breakage unless they specifically pin their kernel version (or possibly use DKMS). That's ABI breakage, and RH explicitly saying that it doesn't count doesn't stop it breaking stuff that would work in a non-rolling release.
- dralley 5y ago
  > The only thing I miss are delta RPMs. Delta RPMs just aren't worth the pain. They were a nice idea at the time but the utility of them has not kept up with the cost of supporting them.
smarx007 5y ago
Recent software just as in Arch while not fearing to upgrade and being unable to boot because you didn't read "edit this config" notice?
Iolaum 5y ago
Not specifically about Fedora but Fedora Silverblue for me: The key value for me is, if an update breaks something, I immediately roll back to the previous image (with just 1 terminal command) and don't have to deal with it unless I actually want to do so.
ayushnix 5y ago
You get SELinux by default if you care about security although it's kinda esoteric and hard to understand. You get to work on a potentially Red Hat Enterprise Linux like distro. Might come in handy professionally. Hmm, can't think of anything else. I use Arch.
- zhengyi13 5y ago
  > SELinux [is] kinda esoteric and hard to understand I don't totally disagree with you, but a thought suddenly struck me: maybe, exactly like Git, it isn't hard to understand, it's just that the UI, UX, and attendant documentation are not written for the majority of their potential audience. And thus, in the same way that many people fix Git problems by simply blowing away their local repo and starting over, SELinux users simply `setenforce 0` and walk away.
tapoxi 5y ago
You get updates every 6 months with a really nice upgrade experience. It is not rolling. Compared to Ubuntu, more stuff is upstreamed and the package management is nicer (dnf history undo is a lifesaver).
- mroche 5y ago
  > You get updates every 6 months with a really nice upgrade experience. It is not rolling. Also worth noting that these updates are optional. A given release has a ~13 months of support: --- We say maintained for approximately 13 months because the supported period for releases is dependent on the date the release under development goes final. As a result, Release X is supported until one month (4 weeks) after the release of Release X+2. This translates into: - Fedora 34 will be maintained until four weeks after the release of Fedora 36. - Fedora 35 will be maintained until four weeks after the release of Fedora 37. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Life_Cycle#Maintenance_Schedule https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Life_Cycle#Mai...
- dralley 5y ago
  You get upgrades every 6 months, but updates are rolled out constantly. For example Fedora gets the very newest kernels at the same pace as something like Arch, even for older releases. Fedora 33 currently has the same kernel as Fedora 35. I would consider it "semi-rolling". It has major releases, and a few packages are pinned for the duration of the release, core stuff like glibc, systemd, GNOME, compilers / toolchains for various languages and so on. But the rest of the system is kept very up to date.
dyingkneepad 5y ago
I think a big advantage of Fedora (also Ubuntu) is that a lot of its maintainers are being paid by Red Hat to maintain it. A lot of times your bug reports are going to be quickly read, you know it's very likely there is someone who is getting paid to ensure whatever problems you may have, don't happen. I know a lot of other distros have this too, but Red Hat employs a lot of Fedora maintainers. OTOH, you're kinda subject to Red Hat's will. But then, every project is subject to its controllers. It's not like the Debian people are doing a good job just because they're not subject to a for-profit company. Personally, I am very thankful for fact that the Fedora project is often the first to adopt certain technologies and inflict in their users the pain of fixing the first bugs and stabilizing the technology. Then a few years later I get it in Debian and it works just fine.
ranger207 5y ago
Fedora is Red Hat's "flagship" distro, in the sense that it's where all the cool new changes debut. Since Red Hat's pretty involved in core Linux development, Fedora is often one of the first places you can get major changes without having to set it up yourself. Like Pipewire for example: it's been available on Arch and Fedora for a while now but Fedora's the first place you can use it without having to set it up yourself afaik.
shams93 5y ago
It depends upon what kind of work you do, like if you do music with Bitwig anything but Ubuntu is going to be a nightmare.
spicyusername 5y ago
Latest packages, little effort

What's advantage of Fedora over something like Arch?

by wooque 5y ago

What's advantage of Fedora over something like Arch?

schmorptron 5y ago

Easy installation, tested packages, a lot of proprietary software comes as rpms but not arch packages

kunagi7 5y ago

First of all, I used to be a Fedora user. The experience most of the time was excellent. Updating was a breeze and via external repos most packages were readily available. Most desktops/spins are well supported like sway, i3, xfce. Nowadays I use Arch which I also think it's a great distro. The only thing I miss are delta RPMs. Also, since CentOS was shut down, Fedora is a good way to learn how Red Hat based distros internals work.

silverfox17 5y ago
CentOS wasn't "shut down"... it's still out there, just as CentOS Stream now. The changes for most users are minimal to not even noticeable.
- smarx007 5y ago
  And there is Rocky Linux for the rest.
  - ollien 5y ago
    I've heard great things about Alma
- JohnTHaller 5y ago
  CentOS Linux is end of life at the end of this year, so in that respect, it was shut down: https://www.centos.org/cl-vs-cs/ https://www.centos.org/cl-vs-cs/ CentOS Stream isn't geared towards production environments according to the CentOS website.
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
  CentOS most certainly was shut down, and replaced with CentOS Stream, which is a similar product that went from at least as stable as RHEL and not having ABI breakage, to the beta for the next RHEL and having ABI breakage. Close enough for many uses, but not the same thing.
  - mroche 5y ago
    > went from at least as stable as RHEL and not having ABI breakage, to the beta for the next RHEL and having ABI breakage. Please review the following resources before making statements about RHEL ABI compatibility in Stream: --- RHEL ABI: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility RHEL Kernel ABI: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/444773 https://access.redhat.com/solutions/444773 Kernel Sources (Module.kabi_<arch>): - RHEL 9: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/kernel - RHEL 8: https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/blob/c8s/f/SOURCES Pat Riehecky - Thinking About Binary Compatibility and CentOS Stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZuvoVau-0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZuvoVau-0 --- As a future version of RHEL, CentOS Stream is bound by the RHEL Application Compatibility Guidelines and kABI stablelist. I'll say it again: CentOS Stream is bound by the RHEL Application Compatibility Guidelines and kABI stablelist. All packages that exist in Stream repos have passed the same internal gating test suites that RHEL has. I'm sorry if this comes off as rough but it is very annoying seeing this "ABI incompatibility" statement be thrown around constantly without people fully understanding what it actually means in the context of RHEL. It is _not_ an all-encompassing policy that applies to the every part of the distribution the same like it would be implied for a library strictly following semver. There are levels and nuance, and some packages don't even make the list (which is why there are packages without a -devel subpackage). It is okay to say that Stream may not be bug-for-bug identical to released versions of RHEL, but it will be ABI compatible.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
      I was thinking specifically in the context of ZFS, which break on minor releases because kernel-internal symbols are not fully stable (unless I've seriously misunderstood https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/11320 https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/11320). And since Stream is a rolling release, users will therefore experience breakage unless they specifically pin their kernel version (or possibly use DKMS). That's ABI breakage, and RH explicitly saying that it doesn't count doesn't stop it breaking stuff that would work in a non-rolling release.
dralley 5y ago
> The only thing I miss are delta RPMs. Delta RPMs just aren't worth the pain. They were a nice idea at the time but the utility of them has not kept up with the cost of supporting them.

smarx007 5y ago

Recent software just as in Arch while not fearing to upgrade and being unable to boot because you didn't read "edit this config" notice?

Iolaum 5y ago

Not specifically about Fedora but Fedora Silverblue for me: The key value for me is, if an update breaks something, I immediately roll back to the previous image (with just 1 terminal command) and don't have to deal with it unless I actually want to do so.

ayushnix 5y ago

You get SELinux by default if you care about security although it's kinda esoteric and hard to understand. You get to work on a potentially Red Hat Enterprise Linux like distro. Might come in handy professionally. Hmm, can't think of anything else. I use Arch.

zhengyi13 5y ago
> SELinux [is] kinda esoteric and hard to understand I don't totally disagree with you, but a thought suddenly struck me: maybe, exactly like Git, it isn't hard to understand, it's just that the UI, UX, and attendant documentation are not written for the majority of their potential audience. And thus, in the same way that many people fix Git problems by simply blowing away their local repo and starting over, SELinux users simply `setenforce 0` and walk away.

tapoxi 5y ago

You get updates every 6 months with a really nice upgrade experience. It is not rolling. Compared to Ubuntu, more stuff is upstreamed and the package management is nicer (dnf history undo is a lifesaver).

mroche 5y ago
> You get updates every 6 months with a really nice upgrade experience. It is not rolling. Also worth noting that these updates are optional. A given release has a ~13 months of support: --- We say maintained for approximately 13 months because the supported period for releases is dependent on the date the release under development goes final. As a result, Release X is supported until one month (4 weeks) after the release of Release X+2. This translates into: - Fedora 34 will be maintained until four weeks after the release of Fedora 36. - Fedora 35 will be maintained until four weeks after the release of Fedora 37. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Life_Cycle#Maintenance_Schedule https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Life_Cycle#Mai...
dralley 5y ago
You get upgrades every 6 months, but updates are rolled out constantly. For example Fedora gets the very newest kernels at the same pace as something like Arch, even for older releases. Fedora 33 currently has the same kernel as Fedora 35. I would consider it "semi-rolling". It has major releases, and a few packages are pinned for the duration of the release, core stuff like glibc, systemd, GNOME, compilers / toolchains for various languages and so on. But the rest of the system is kept very up to date.

dyingkneepad 5y ago

I think a big advantage of Fedora (also Ubuntu) is that a lot of its maintainers are being paid by Red Hat to maintain it. A lot of times your bug reports are going to be quickly read, you know it's very likely there is someone who is getting paid to ensure whatever problems you may have, don't happen. I know a lot of other distros have this too, but Red Hat employs a lot of Fedora maintainers. OTOH, you're kinda subject to Red Hat's will. But then, every project is subject to its controllers. It's not like the Debian people are doing a good job just because they're not subject to a for-profit company. Personally, I am very thankful for fact that the Fedora project is often the first to adopt certain technologies and inflict in their users the pain of fixing the first bugs and stabilizing the technology. Then a few years later I get it in Debian and it works just fine.

ranger207 5y ago

Fedora is Red Hat's "flagship" distro, in the sense that it's where all the cool new changes debut. Since Red Hat's pretty involved in core Linux development, Fedora is often one of the first places you can get major changes without having to set it up yourself. Like Pipewire for example: it's been available on Arch and Fedora for a while now but Fedora's the first place you can use it without having to set it up yourself afaik.

shams93 5y ago

It depends upon what kind of work you do, like if you do music with Bitwig anything but Ubuntu is going to be a nightmare.

spicyusername 5y ago

Latest packages, little effort