1 |
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 12:24 +0000, Duncan wrote: |
2 |
> Daniel Pielmeier <daniel.pielmeier@××××××××××.com> posted |
3 |
> 6142e6140905150344y4a8007b5wd352ffe891e49230@××××××××××.com, excerpted |
4 |
> below, on Fri, 15 May 2009 12:44:47 +0200: |
5 |
> |
6 |
> > 2009/5/15 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) <hkBst@g.o>: |
7 |
> >> |
8 |
> >> Thilo Bangert wrote: |
9 |
> >>> |
10 |
> >>> Fedora is a much more current distribution than Gentoo - and has been |
11 |
> >>> for a couple of years... |
12 |
> >> |
13 |
> >> Please elaborate what exactly you think Fedora does better than we do. |
14 |
> >> I have no first-hand experience with Fedora, but from what I read I had |
15 |
> >> the impression that sometimes they go with new stuff before it is |
16 |
> >> ready, like KDE4 and pulseaudio. I like about the current situation |
17 |
> >> that we also have all those things available AFAICS, but have very |
18 |
> >> broad choices in how much we want to bleed. IMO this is a different |
19 |
> >> issue than having supposedly popular ebuilds not in main tree. |
20 |
> >> |
21 |
> > AFAIK Fedora is [Red Hat's unstable.] So it makes more sense to |
22 |
> > compare it with the Gentoo unstable tree instead of the stable |
23 |
> > one. Assuming this there is probably not a big difference in the |
24 |
> > up-to-dateness. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> Well, yes and no. As the GP said, they sometimes go with new stuff |
27 |
> before it's ready -- before Gentoo even has it in-tree hard-masked let |
28 |
> alone ~arch, while it's still in the various project overlays. I know |
29 |
> they've had some serious issues with xorg on Intel GPUs at least, due to |
30 |
> running versions that aren't in our tree yet, only in the X overlay, |
31 |
> because Fedora is running clearly not even ~arch-ready packages, |
32 |
> sometimes even xorg prereleases. |
33 |
|
34 |
I believe you are thinking of rawhide. |
35 |
Fedora and quite most other distributions work fundamentally different. |
36 |
We have a gradually moving tree, as we can do that by being source |
37 |
based. |
38 |
Fedora and other distributions are doing releases, which involves |
39 |
switching to a newer repository branch with dist-upgrade and so on. |
40 |
They release a new version typically every 6 month, we release new major |
41 |
versions of packages all the time (considering the whole set). |
42 |
I'd say that at the point of binary distribution releases their released |
43 |
trees are somewhere between our ~arch and stable tree, while within a |
44 |
month or two, they become similar to our stable tree until our continous |
45 |
releases overcome it with newer versions. |
46 |
Fedora has xorg prereleases in what they call "rawhide". This is what |
47 |
will become a new release in the future, as they have ~6 month cycles. |
48 |
It's unstable on purpose, as they are thriving towards being stable with |
49 |
that repository at the time of the planned next release, while having up |
50 |
to date packages around the time of the release (with a ~1 month |
51 |
stabilization period before the release time). That's the fundamental |
52 |
difference, and where we can have an advantage over them in addition to |
53 |
other things coming from being source based. |
54 |
|
55 |
> Years ago we'd have put these in-tree but hard-masked for those who |
56 |
> wanted to try them. Now, depending on the package and Gentoo but more |
57 |
> likely as the complexity rises to meta-package levels, those who want to |
58 |
> try them must load an overlay. As someone who selectively unmasks and |
59 |
> tries these, having them in-tree but hard-masked is convenient, but I |
60 |
> understand why projects may prefer overlays in many cases. |
61 |
|
62 |
We do tend to prefer overlays in many cases for unstable releases. |
63 |
The project proposal at hand is of course talking about packages that |
64 |
are not available at all in the main tree yet. Overlays are quite nice |
65 |
for tracking unstable releases of package sets that do have their |
66 |
upstream stable releases in official tree. |
67 |
|
68 |
> However, none of this directly applies to the subject at hand, because |
69 |
> while we're talking new versions of packages already in-tree here, the |
70 |
> subject at hand is packages that aren't in-tree in any form yet. |
71 |
|
72 |
Sorry, still felt like replying with my view on Gentoo vs dist-upgraded |
73 |
distros :) |
74 |
|
75 |
|
76 |
|
77 |
-- |
78 |
Mart Raudsepp |
79 |
Gentoo Developer |
80 |
Mail: leio@g.o |
81 |
Weblog: http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/leio |