On Fri, 2004-01-16 at 15:51, Timothy Murphy wrote: > On Wednesday 14 January 2004 14:23, Phil Schaffner wrote: > > > > It's just as stable or unstable as RH-9. > > > Think of it as RH-10, and you won't be far wrong. > > > > Not quite. The Fedora update cycle is "4-6 months" with update lifetime > > "2-3 months after next release" versus "12-18 months" and "At least 5 > > years" for RHEL according to http://fedora.redhat.com/about/rhel.html. > > > This is MUCH more dynamic than any past Red Hat release/update schedule, > > and unlike RH-9 or RHm.n you do not have any option to purchase Red Hat > > support. WBEL, Tao, or other RHEL-derived community-supported distros > > have the same short-coming in support, but at least will be tracking a > > more stable/supported base. > > I assume the poster knew about RHEL, > so presumably he doesn't want to pay for support. Yup - the original post mentions RHEL. You're probably right about not wanting to pay the support bill, but he didn't explicitly say so. > The support you got with RH-9 without special payment > was more or less useless, in my experience. > (I asked a couple of questions during my month's free support, > and the responses I got were not helpful.) Can't argue with that - my experience has been pretty much the same over a number of years of buying boxed sets, but did want to financially support Red Hat, and it was at least a lot less expensive for a [luke]warm-fuzzy than RHEL. > My recollection is that some RH distributions > only lasted 6 months or so before a new distribution came out, > so 4-6 months is not that different. The upgrade frequency is not so much the problem as the short period of supported updates after the end of the cycle. Fedora Legacy may mitigate this somewhat if it flies. > Anyway, in my opinion the poster should go ahead > and upgrade to Fedora-1. Fedora-1 is certainly working OK on the end-user machines we have it on. I'm just nervous about it for server functions where stability is much more important (although the post I saw today on the whitebox-users list about 61 RHEL errata packages released since yesterday might make one question this logic - supposedly due to the "quarterly update" philosophy). > One thing is certain, there is no lack of advice > if he/she meets any problems. For sure dude! Cheers, Phil > > -- > Timothy Murphy > e-mail (<80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie > tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 > s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland -- Philip R. Schaffner, Aerospace Technologist Airborne Systems Competency, Sensors Research Branch NASA/Langley Research Center, MS 473 8 North Dryden Street, B1299, Room 109 Hampton, VA 23681-2199 Phone: (757)864-1809 FAX: (757)864-7891 E-mail: Philip.R.Schaffner@xxxxxxxx URL: http://awin.larc.nasa.gov/awinpages/philips.htm
