Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: where goes Gentoo?
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 13:44:06
Message-Id: 1123076347.31550.17.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: where goes Gentoo? by "Sven Köhler"
1 On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 13:55 +0200, Sven Köhler wrote:
2 > > In my humble opinion, Gentoo is missing too many points to be an
3 > > enterprise Linux. We commit to a live tree. We don't have true QA,
4 > > testing or tinderbox. We don't have paid staff, alpha/beta/rc cycles.
5 > > We don't really have product lifecycles, since we don't generally
6 > > backport fixes to older versions, requiring instead for people to
7 > > update to a more recent release. We don't have, and probably will
8 > > never be able to offer, support contracts. We support as wide a range
9 > > of hardware as the upstream kernel, plus hardware that requires
10 > > external drivers; we don't have access to a great deal of the hardware
11 > > for which we provide drivers. We understand when real life gets in
12 > > the way of bug-fixing, because all our developers are volunteers.
13 >
14 > QA is a problem. Bugs get fixed, but often they are only fixed in ~x86
15 > versions, not in the stable x86 series. For example baselayout: there
16 > are lot of ~x86 - miles ahead of that is marked x86. Maintainers think,
17 > it's sufficient to only fix the most recent version. How do they
18 > legitimate that?
19
20 This one is easy. A stable package's ebuild should not change. Period.
21 To "fix" the stable version, means that a new revision of the latest
22 stable version would need to be made, and that revision would need to be
23 tested, before it would go to stable. The only real exception to this
24 is security bugs. Also, in many cases, the bug in question requires
25 changes that are simply not feasible easily in the current stable
26 version, but quite easy in the latest version. It really boils down to
27 this: If you're having an issue with a package in Gentoo and it is
28 fixed in the latest ~arch version, then you should *use* the ~arch
29 version (remember, it doesn't mean "unstable" it means "testing") and
30 you should report back to the maintainers that this is working for you
31 so that they can get it moved into stable quicker. We don't have the
32 staff or the time to backport every fix to every stable version.
33 Remember that in many cases the "latest stable" version varies between
34 architectures.
35
36 > And yes, Gentoo does not backport patches to older version. But is it
37 > Gentoo's responsibility? If there's a bug in Postgresql 7.x and 8.x, and
38 > the PostgreSQL people only fix it 8.x-series - well: Debian and Redhat
39 > will backport the patches propably. They is a big reason why all the
40 > distrubutions with precompiled packages do that:
41 > - the updates has to be binary compatible with the old one
42
43 I don't feel that this is our responsibility. While we sometimes do
44 backport patches, we just don't have the manpower to make it policy.
45
46 > Gentoo doesn't suffer from that limitation. Gentoo offers ways to
47 > migrate a system from openssl 0.9.6 to openssl 0.9.7 for example. Other
48 > distributions doesn't offer that - although they could with better
49 > package managers.
50
51 Right.
52
53 > Administrating a Gentoo system takes time - much time, but ...
54
55 This is something that I think most people forget. Running Gentoo makes
56 you a Linux Systems Administrator. Sure, you're only being the
57 administrator for your machine, which might only have one user, but
58 you're the admin. With some of the other distributions, *they* are the
59 admin, and you're just a user. They make assumptions for you and limit
60 what you can and cannot do (without an enormous amount of work to bypass
61 their limits). This is especially apparent in the many cases where
62 users expect Gentoo to do everything for them, when it doesn't.
63
64 > ... writing my own packages for - let's say Redhat - takes more time
65 > than writing an ebuild for Gentoo. If you have to maintain a system with
66 > very special software, i would recomm Gentoo.
67
68 I would agree with you. Professionally, I work on Red Hat. I have to
69 build custom RPMs on a daily basis, and I can say that the simple syntax
70 of ebuilds is a tremendous advantage.
71
72 > Just some days ago, someone reinstalled a Server where we had PostGreSQL
73 > 8.0 running. He chose to install Debian - which offers PostGreSQL 7.4 -
74 > so what did he do? He compiled PostGreSQL 8.0 himself, to be abled to
75 > use our existing database. This will become hell the more packages you
76 > have to compile on you own. Any configure-make-install-like package,
77 > Perl-Module, etc... can be easy installed by using an ebuild.
78
79 You aren't "supposed" to compile packages on your own on Debian. You're
80 supposed to make your own DEB package and install that. Otherwise, you
81 are working outside the package manager. This is no different than on
82 Gentoo, just for many people, an ebuild is easier to write than creating
83 a DEB/RPM.
84
85 > In addition Gentoo is the only distribution i know, that supports
86 > installing multiple Java-version etc...
87 > A must-have for every real java-developer.
88
89 Agreed. This is also very true for proprietary applications that rely
90 on java.
91
92 > So i'd say: use Debian, if you have a relativly normal system to
93 > maintain, use Gentoo if you have the time - and never ever use Redhat or
94 > SuSE.
95
96 Gentoo tends to be more flexible with a smaller amount of work. This
97 makes it an excellent development platform, which is another reason why
98 many people say that Gentoo is "for the developers" first. I also think
99 that it is a wonderful end-user platform. My girlfriend runs Gentoo and
100 loves it. I started her off on Red Hat, and she found lots of little
101 things that bugged her, so I showed her Gentoo, and she was hooked,
102 since it was so easy for her to change those little peculiarities, not
103 to mention she knows a lot more about what it going on behind the scenes
104 then with those little redhat-config-* apps.
105
106 I personally hope that Gentoo never changes. I'd like to see quality
107 improve, but that doesn't require any major changes to Gentoo itself.
108 As far as enterprise support, I think a fork is honestly the best
109 answer. Not a fork that becomes completely independent, but a fork
110 focused on providing the enterprise features, like a slower release
111 cycle and backporting fixes, and rolling what it can back into Gentoo.
112 I think this sort of symbiotic relationship is really the only way to
113 successfully move Gentoo into the enterprise.
114
115 --
116 Chris Gianelloni
117 Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
118 Games - Developer
119 Gentoo Linux

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: where goes Gentoo? Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>
[gentoo-dev] Re: where goes Gentoo? "Sven Köhler" <skoehler@×××.de>