[lug] How long will FC7 get security updates?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 09:52:18 -0600
davide.del.vento at gmail.com ("Davide Del Vento") wrote:

> >> And that's why now I'm runny Hardy on all my machines, and I'll be
> >> sticky to it until the next Ubuntu LTS will be released - you might
> >> consider the same strategy.
> >
> > Sure, if you want a slower moving release with a longer supported
> > lifecycle that's absolutely the way to go. I use CentOS in those
> > cases, but Ubuntu LTS is another good choice.
> >
> > Note that you do want the LTS release of Ubuntu for this. Normal
> > Ubuntu releases are only supported for 18months (only a short time
> > more than Fedora releases).
> 
> Well, 18months might seem "only short time more than" 13months. But
> that's 38%, and I'd not say that 38% more is "short" (surely we would
> not say so about 38% more money). For me that additional months were
> very useful.

Sorry, you are quite right... 

> Then, there is another issue to take in mind: overlap of the
> subsequent releases, see
> http://www.ubuntu.com/products/ubuntu/release-cycle
> If you plan to update the whole installation at every new release,
> this is not an issue: both Fedora and Ubuntu are the same (= every six
> months). But if you plan to update the whole installation once a year
> (like I did in the past) or even less (like I do now), you have only a
> single month for the task with FC, compared to 6 months for Ubuntu
> "standard" and a whole year for Ubuntu LTS!

Yes indeed. 

Also 1 year for Debian. 

> Of course there are many other things to keep in mind about the choice
> of a distribution, but if having an updated linux is critical for you,
> and if you want a flexible schedule for the whole installation update,
> IMHO Ubuntu is the best choice (LTS or "standard" depending on your
> pace).

Sure. Choosing a distro can be a pretty personal thing based on your
constraints. I like Fedora for desktop machines and some testing
servers that aren't in production. I like the fast pace and staying on
the bleeding edge. For production machines or machines that shouldn't
need to be updated as often I like CentOS. 

> I didn't try CentOS, but I did try the latest RedHad (which should be
> the same). Hardware support was a pain for my laptop (the same hw is
> nicely supported by Ubuntu LTS). Of course, on hardware support your
> mileage may vary, and if you use an older machine you may don't care
> about it at all.

Yeah, totally agreed. 

> Bye,
> ;Dav

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/pipermail/lug/attachments/20080919/7c00ac97/attachment.pgp>