Re: ever migrate from Fedora to Scientific Linux or CentOS?

Michael Semcheski wrote:
On 10/31/07, Paul Johnson <pauljohn32@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The unexpected bug introduced by frequent updates (much less
re-installs) have lost some of their charm for us.
...
In the past I've resisted adopting these longer lived distros because,
well, they get outdated and frustrating because they don't
interoperate with the rapidly changing part of the Linux world.
...
So maybe I don't want Scientific Linux or CentOS. Wish the
RedHat/Fedora Legacy group had not disbanded. For security updates on
a one year old distro, it was very handy.

I agree very much with your sentiment. On our servers we run
Scientific Linux. The desktops run Fedora.

The servers are great, but admittedly we use a much smaller set of
software. With the desktops, its either do updates frequently or do
them 500 at a time. I'd be a lot happier if the kernel was updated
less frequently (like with the server.)

Right now, I think the happy medium might be with the latest SL, and a
few applications like Firefox and Thunderbird compiled by hand in
/usr/local/...



Currently I care for SL5 (my current desktop at home), CentOS 4 (desktop at work, and a server at home) and WBEL 4. Oh, and a RHL 7.3->CentOS3 for theboss@home. I should also mention some FC and an OpenSUSE10.2 laptop.

I would have no concerns about SL5 or CentOS5. Choose based on package selection; SL5 may have the edge for you. Both are built from RHEL5 source with minimal changes, but SL5 has extras for the scientific community.

There is no reason at all why you can't install SL, and use packages from the CentOS repos, RHEL users do it fairly regularly.

I think SL supports Atheros wireless out of the box, and includes real Java and some other stuff important to scientists.


The main difference I see between SL and CentOS is the size of the communities and work force; Essentially, SL is done by (I think) two people (but I think they're paid to do it) whilst CentOS, like Fedora, is chiefly done by volunteers.

Both are supported by mailing lists, and I reckon if one's using RHEL-Clone then hanging out on the relevant RHEL list is also appropriate.

There used to be Tao linux, and google may still know of it. It merged with CentOS a while back.

WBEL is basically "what we use here, built from RHEL source. You may use it, but don't come here for help." It was an okay choice when I downloaded it, but I see no reason to prefer it now.

You could also look at SUSE, and maybe evaluate it. it's rpm-based, and yast really is very nice. There's no SUSE-clone that I've noticed, but OTOH the licence fees may be fairly modest for academe.

Academe should also check out RHEL prices; I haven't for some time, but I think one can run RHEL for a modest cost (and get extremely modest support).



As for upgrading, I think that all that's needed to upgrade from FC to Tikanga-clone is to boot the media and go for it. That might be some required magic (upgradeany os some such), and one should check ("rpm -qa --last | less") for packages that didn't get upgraded and explore why not. likely some will be orphaned, but those could be a problem however you do it.

FC3->Tikanga-clone should be about the same upgrade as the (supported) Nahant->Tikanga, and FC6->Tikanga like Tikanga->Tikanga, and I think that's supported too.



--

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Z1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

Please do not reply off-list

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Relevant Pages

  • Re: FC4 good new tech, bad legacy support
    ... you get a far better idea from looking at the RHEL releases. ... take a step back and consider that Red Hat will continue to support ... If it ain't broke, don't fix it. ... upgrade and the support costs associated ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: [kde-linux] dought
    ... It has the same software as RHEL*, but without the commercial support. ... So for CentOS, it's up to the users to figure things out (with help from RHEL documentation) and share information. ... Matthew Seitz ...
    (KDE)
  • Re: Updating FC3
    ... FC3 is no longer supported, ... is to use a RHEL clone such as Scientific Linux or CentOS. ... updates that were available before the support for FC3 stopped. ...
    (linux.redhat.misc)
  • Re: Migration from RHEL WS 5 to Fedora
    ... RHEL WS or CentOS / Scientific Linux. ... the machines continously freeze two times a day or more, even when idle, ... Centos 5 has been very stable for me across a variety of machines, but I always do a clean install and copy back any local data. ... If you did an upgrade you may have something left from the old version that shouldn't be there. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: CentOS vs Redhat
    ... > Can anyone tell me if the driver support in CentOS is identical to Redhat's? ... Use Fedora Core unless you actually need RHEL because ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)