[olug] Installing multiple linux distros...

[adunlop]

> That being said, I think we're digressing here. I was just trying to
> express that installing something that is already old the day you
> install it doesn't make your system more stable. I don't understand
> the mentality that old equates to stable, since it likely has bugs
> that the new version fixes. But again, to each their own.

Makes sense to me.  When a new version is out, the bleeding-edge  
distros run it, log all of their bugs, bug fixes are applied and  
eventually enough are worked out that it's considered stable.  Once  
it's stable, server distros pick it up and add it to their distro.   
There shouldn't be patches necessary for bugs at that point.  As far  
as the newer features in newer software go, you're free to install  
whatever you want.

The only thing age has to do with it is the number of testing-hours  
that's in before it's ready for production use.

Aaron

> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Jay  
> Swackhamer<Jay at reboottheuser.com> wrote:
>> It is a major hassle, when the applications/databases are supposed to
>> be up 24/7/365 and coordinating several projects to agree to the same
>> downtime is sometimes not possible.
>>
>> Oracle cluster,
>> # uptime
>>  15:01:35 up 388 days, 11:05,  3 users,  load average: 2.43, 2.08,  
>> 1.70
>>
>> --
>> Jay Swackhamer
>> Reboot The User
>> 402-933-6449
>> http://www.reboottheuser.com
>> http://www.cafepress.com/rtu
>> http://stores.ebay.com/RebootTheUser
>> http://www.hotr.com
>>
>>
>> Quoting "T. J. Brumfield" <enderandrew at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Yes, but they only patch what they see as security issues as opposed
>>> to all bugs.
>>>
>>> As far as migration goes, we're talking minor updates to packages.  
>>> The
>>> nice thing about Linux is that you can patch without a full reboot.
>>> Most shops automatically account for patching all Windows boxes are
>>> rebooting them once a month. Yet the idea of trying to update a  
>>> Linux
>>> box once every six months is considered a major hassle.
>>>
>>> -- T. J. Brumfield
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 2:41 PM, adunlop<techworld.mail at gmail.com>  
>>> wrote:
>>>> RHEL patches security issues rather quickly.  CentOS does as well  
>>>> from
>>>> what I've seen.  The advantage to having older software is that you
>>>> have to update less often.  Fedora may have a 12 month lifespan,  
>>>> but
>>>> with RHEL you have 7 years.  Migrating production servers is a task
>>>> best done at a more leisurely pace than annually :)
>>>>
>>>> Aaron
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 5, 2009, at 2:14 PM, T. J. Brumfield wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> CentOS is the primary distro I use.  Aside from a glitchy network
>>>>>> driver for the Realtek 8138/8139 integrated NIC on the AMD  
>>>>>> SB700/770
>>>>>> chipsets I've not had to mess with drivers at all.  That driver
>>>>>> really
>>>>>> isn't CentOS's fault either.  It does run behind on kernel  
>>>>>> versions
>>>>>> but hey, it's a server distro, stability and long-life wins.   
>>>>>> You're
>>>>>> always free to roll your own :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aaron
>>>>>
>>>>> There are those that prefer old versions because they feel old
>>>>> versions are inherently more stable. Others prefer bleeding edge
>>>>> because they feel that they will have the most features, and the
>>>>> latest fixes. Honestly, I'm not sure there is a huge difference in
>>>>> stability between the two unless package maintainers make the  
>>>>> effort
>>>>> to backport fixes without backporting new features. There are  
>>>>> people
>>>>> who maintain older kernel lines for exactly that reason, but  
>>>>> overall
>>>>> even new kernel releases are pretty stable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most major distros and projects within the Linux-verse implement a
>>>>> feature-freeze before releasing to focus on fixing bugs without  
>>>>> adding
>>>>> any features. I'm not sure that intentionally running old versions
>>>>> gives you any benefits.
>>>>>
>>>>> But to each their own. The beauty of Linux is that you're afforded
>>>>> that choice to do as you please.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- T. J. Brumfield
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> https://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug