[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Fedora philosophy (was ATI video comes out of the closet)



On Sunday 09 September 2007, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 15:11:52 -0500,
>
>   Les Mikesell <lesmikesell gmail com> wrote:
> > I'd categorize it as saying it doesn't meet the needs of most people who
> > could be using Linux as their desktop machine.  The people 'here' are a
>
> And so what. That isn't the distro it is trying to be. That is more of an
> Ubuntu goal.

Having done significant testing on Ubuntu (primarily because of the superior 
software repository and lack of the 'mixing' issues), and having done some 
support of 'ordinary' users on Ubuntu, let me say this:  when it comes to the 
kernel interfaces, Ubuntu suffers the same fate as Fedora does.  Have to do 
that same things if you want to run VMware, for instance.  The kernel 
interface issue is upstream, and any distribution tracking 2.6 is going to 
have unstable kernel API's. It is not a Fedora disease; it is a kernel 
development process disease, and it's broken.

The decision to drop having a stable, security-updated, kernel line stinks.  
If you run a CentOS or RHEL base, you are going to have a stable kernel with 
security updates, backported by Red Hat.  But, you know, I've had a few 
issues even there, where a kernel update did weird things (like reorder 
NIC's, remove support for an older RAID controller, etc).  Reading the 
release notes and changelog isn't even enough for some of these patches; one 
must in some cases track the actual source RPM patchsets and changes, on 
certain hardware.  At least the VMware binary modules drop in happily without 
a recompile.
-- 
Lamar Owen
Chief Information Officer
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
(828)862-5554
www.pari.edu


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]