long term support release

[Les Mikesell]

Richi Plana wrote:

>> Say the LTS cycle is one release every two years (every fourth Fedora
>> release), and that the 'long term' for support only lasts for two years
>> (which is pretty short to use the term long for, I realize), then there
>> would only be one LTS release, and also the most current release to
>> worry about at any given time.
> 
> I was about to say that that is exactly what RHEL-to-CentOS is for, but
> thinking about it, I think I know what your problem is with CentOS.

The problem with CentOS is that updates aren't really updates with new 
features as you would have in fedora updates.  They are 
security/bugfixes backed into the same old versions.

> One thing not factored with CentOS is how old it is compared to the
> version of Fedora that it's supposed to be based upon. If I understand
> you correctly, your concept of LTS is based on the Final stable release
> of Fedora and will be supported for two years as opposed to some version
> of CentOS which upon release is probably years behind the final release
> of rawhide it was based on and therefore obsolete with hardware (which
> also has a fast release cycle). (Could someone do the math?)

I'm not sure I understand the hardware issue.  If you need to keep 
something running a long time, you must have already had the system on 
hardware with working support.  What's missing is an option to upgrade 
apps to versions with current features.  I think the best you can do is 
run the latest version of CentOS, pick the few apps that you really care 
about and rebuild new versions yourself periodically either from the 
upstream source or fedora src rpms when possible.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com