George Alexeief wrote:
As a very happy RH9 user, I was also a little worried about what switching to Fedora will mean -- instability? No support? From what I gather so far, it seems that Fedora Core will fill the gap that RH9's death will create.
Me, I'm hoping that, with the little-bang releases every quarter, that some brave soul will push for apt-get/yum/WHATEVER;get-over-it upgradability between them, that people who didn't hand-roll anything could almost upgrade between one and the other remotely. Some rumour suggested that a bunch of crazy Brasilians had this distro where they wanted to almost offer that.
Something that would allow me to keep my machine(s)in recent-release shape without forcing me to show up in person with a CD (and, for one of them, that's a plane trip) on scheduled access, that would be fabulous. Yeah, it'd require some new testing, but, as a motivator to people so they keep their boxes up to date, it goes way better than an EOL notice. Or, at least, that's what our field engs are saying at work.
And if Fedora doesn't cut it, then there's always SuSe -- so no matter what, us low-cost Linux users will have somewhere to go.
Choose your distro wisely. The implementation costs aren't counted in 'low cost', of course, and, while we save on licenses, those implementation costs and development platform frustrations of the ~wrong distro can really ruin a day.
jdw wrote:
I tried SUSE 9.0 and it didn't fill the void that not having RH9 would leave.
I think it's the only one with %{buildroot}="/" and very few BuildRequires listed as such. THAT can be exciting, especially when, after rebuilding the kernel RPM on an installed machine out of completely different SRPMs, the machine stops booting.
jdw continued: > I must say that I believe Fedora is going to be a great distribution.
I can't be so optimistic, but I will say it will probably be the best in a world after RH9, and one without CL to give FDR a good bit of competition. Those Brasilians really grok Apt.
- bish
