[PLUG] Distro concerns

[Tim]

> I wish there was an attempt to take a stable distro like CentOS which
> works without updates and add modern features to it.  I realize that
> CentOS is an enterprise distribution that tries to follow RHEL, but
> the problem is that there needs to be something between CentOS and
> Fedora.
>
> [...]
> 
> I find the Ubuntu root business with sudo a bit odd.  I am also
> uncomfortable with the fact that Ubuntu tends to be installed from
> a CD that doesn't contain most of the Ubuntu packages.  I don't want
> to use a Linux distribution that isn't supported for very long if 
> I'm expected to go to the Internet to get packages for it.  Even
> though Ubuntu is supposedly a desktop operating system, I know my
> brother uses it on his server system.
>

I'm just going to say it:  You can't have your cake and eat it too.
You want an up-to-date distro that's been fully tested.  Well, there
just aren't enough resources around to do this in the open source
community.  

Microsoft comes close to achieving this, but they do it by cutting
corners and don't actually package any serious amount of third-party
software.  (I know this isn't a Linux vs. Windows discussion, but I
think the comparison helps us understand what's reasonable to expect
from a vendor.) Microsoft forces hardware developers to do the driver
work, and many of the sorts of packages that Linux distros always come
with by default (compilers, interpreters, editors, audio/video, ...)
have to be installed separately on Windows with a different release
cycle.  Linux distros, on the other hand, package everything together
and even maintain the majority of the drivers for supported hardware.
It's a complex task.  Microsoft's advantage here, is that if some
driver or third party software package comes out buggy, they can just
blame someone else or force Dell and the like to test things for them
on particular platforms.

Linux distributions are all about collecting thousands of packages
into a somewhat coherent installation.  Many of them are not going to
be well tested *and* be updated frequently because some are only
seriously used by ~5 people.

Anyway, depending on the purpose of your installation, you can always
pick between multiple levels of stability/updatedness on that
spectrum.  You just can't get both with any distro and I doubt that
will change any time soon.


> The nice thing about CentOS is that you can literally order a DVD
> for it and without the updates it will work.

> I wish there was a Linux distro that takes Fedora and fixes anything
> that breaks before making a new release.  No updates between releases.
> Frequent releases with the ability to upgrade existing systems.


My opinion?  Software is a living thing; lack of care and feeding
leads to death.  No longer can you stand still in a connected network,
no matter what vendor you are talking about.  As soon as someone burns
that convenient DVD and you install it, you're behind.  Install from
the network and you download less and get more up-to-date software.

You need to, at a minimum, apply security patches.  Many Linux distros
apply only security and serious bug updates and don't change
functionality which keeps them stable.  If you're not connecting a
device to a network at all, then just don't bother with the patches...


Good luck in your quest,
tim