| 1 |
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Andreas K. Huettel |
| 2 |
<dilfridge@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Stable implies "not so often changing". If you really need newer packages on a |
| 5 |
> system that has to be rock-solid, then keyword what you need and nothing else. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
++ |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
30 days is too long? How can something new be stable? Stable doesn't |
| 10 |
mean "I don't think this is broken." Stable means "lots of others |
| 11 |
have already been using this and so far there aren't many reports of |
| 12 |
breakage." |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
According to distrowatch RHEL is at 2.6.32. I'm sure it has a |
| 15 |
bazillion backports, but that is what I'd call stable. Running stable |
| 16 |
means starting to use the stuff everybody else is about ready to stop |
| 17 |
using. When an upstream releases a new stable release, that means |
| 18 |
that it is just now ready for testing, and chances are they'll have |
| 19 |
another stable release before their previous release really is stable. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
If you need the release two days after it comes out, you're not really |
| 22 |
looking for a stable release. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
At work we typically buy stuff about a year after it comes out, and by |
| 25 |
the time we're done doing integration and testing it is probably two |
| 26 |
years old and we've gotten 27 patches in the meantime. That's stable. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Gentoo is one of the few distros that really lets you mix and match, |
| 29 |
so run stable on the stuff you don't care about, and if the purpose of |
| 30 |
the box is to serve apps on Rails then by all means use ~arch on Ruby. |
| 31 |
You can do that and not worry about whether it is going to be broken |
| 32 |
by the latest glibc or coreutils or whatever. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Rich |
Archives