Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Rolling-Release Version Of Fedora Is Discussed

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A Rolling-Release Version Of Fedora Is Discussed

    Phoronix: A Rolling-Release Version Of Fedora Is Discussed

    A discussion erupted this morning among Fedora developers about having a version of Fedora Linux that operates on a rolling-release model similar to Arch Linux, Gentoo, and openSUSE Tumbleweed...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA0Nzc

  • #2
    So how is Debian CUT doing these days? Did they achieve anything?

    Comment


    • #3
      The problems CUT is facing are described here http://np237.livejournal.com/31868.html

      Comment


      • #4
        Some developers were quick to call Fedora Rawhide their rolling-release, except that Rawhide is not always stable and can easily break in significant ways from time-to-time.
        That describes all rolling-release distros. I'm not just saying that as a hater, I grew up on Gentoo and currently use Arch.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gigaplex View Post
          That describes all rolling-release distros. I'm not just saying that as a hater, I grew up on Gentoo and currently use Arch.
          Did you use Gentoo with stable keywords? I can't speak for the Gentoo crowd about stability since I use the unstable/current keyword.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by renkin View Post
            Did you use Gentoo with stable keywords? I can't speak for the Gentoo crowd about stability since I use the unstable/current keyword.
            For a while. It didn't make a heck of a lot of difference, portage broke just as easily (especially if it had been several weeks since the last update).

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by gigaplex View Post
              That describes all rolling-release distros. I'm not just saying that as a hater, I grew up on Gentoo and currently use Arch.
              Arch does break sometimes, but is definitely more stable than using something like rawhide.... Also arch packages don't ship with debugging stuff enabled.

              Comment


              • #8
                Debian SID + aptlist-bugs is like a rolling release, not so update in some packages or slower to deliver some last versions of other packages, but it's good and stable.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Rolling distros are mainly addressed for people who know how to deal with them. Gentoo didn't break for me in years and I never lost any data. But for less experienced people who don't know how to solve every potential problem, this might be show stopper. Generally I believe Fedora is very good binary distro and they should stick with it.

                  The idea of binary rolling distro is very challenging. Perosnally I keep all by Gentoo servers updated with binary packages and sometimes it can be a headache to make sure everything works well with such frequent version/API/ABI changes. Takes a lot of time for testnig.
                  Rob
                  email: dagger@gentoo.org

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Practically rejected by developers.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by gigaplex View Post
                      That describes all rolling-release distros. I'm not just saying that as a hater, I grew up on Gentoo and currently use Arch.
                      It's not like non-rolling distributions don't cause breakage, it's just that they cause all the damage every six months, or maybe at larger time intervals if you decide to skip a release or use LTS.
                      I used Redhat (before it split into Fedora and RHEL), Fedora, Suse/Opensuse, Kubuntu before finally settling with Gentoo and all of them broke heavily when updating to a new version.
                      With Gentoo I do get some breakage from time to time but at smaller scale and it's also easier to identify the package that caused it then when upgrading all the packages in a classic dist-upgrade.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I'm a long-time user of PCLinuxOS. It's a rolling release. Yes, it doesn't work perfect, but it works close enough. Upgrading every 6 months is a pain, and even that's not a guarantee you'll have a stable system. Unlike openSuse Tumbleweed, if Fedora wants to do the rolling release right, it needs to support DKMS. I'm not a user of Fedora, so it might already and I don't know it, but this is important. At openSuse, when the kernel upgrades, you need to invoke a console command to rebuild the module for nVidia. With DKMS, this is all done for you. I cannot believe a distro puts out a rolling release without supporting DKMS out of the bag.

                        Mageia gave the same speech as Fedora with the subject of rolling releases came up. They said their Cauldron development release would work for those wanting a rolling release. What some of these people lost in the stone age of Linux distros done't seem to get is that reinstalling every 6 months is not what most users want. They want to set it and forget it. Users want the latest KDE, Gnome, etc. without waiting for the next release.

                        In my experience, rolling releases are rock solid - more-so than the big release every 6 months. I used to pray I'd have no problems with the new release when I used Ubuntu. Then, there was the time I had to spend resetting my desktop up, adding all my favorite apps back in... Now, I occasionally wipe and reinstall, but mostly just use the system. I just did the first reinstall in over a year and a half. Seems to work great for me.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ruel24 View Post
                          I'm a long-time user of PCLinuxOS. It's a rolling release. Yes, it doesn't work perfect, but it works close enough. Upgrading every 6 months is a pain, and even that's not a guarantee you'll have a stable system. Unlike openSuse Tumbleweed, if Fedora wants to do the rolling release right, it needs to support DKMS. I'm not a user of Fedora, so it might already and I don't know it, but this is important. At openSuse, when the kernel upgrades, you need to invoke a console command to rebuild the module for nVidia. With DKMS, this is all done for you. I cannot believe a distro puts out a rolling release without supporting DKMS out of the bag.

                          Mageia gave the same speech as Fedora with the subject of rolling releases came up. They said their Cauldron development release would work for those wanting a rolling release. What some of these people lost in the stone age of Linux distros done't seem to get is that reinstalling every 6 months is not what most users want. .
                          There is no need to reinstall every six months or even every one year. Just because there is a new release doesn't mean you need to reinstall and besides why would you reinstall instead of upgrading? Most users don't want major changes rapidly in updates either (moving from KDE 3 to 4 or GNOME 2 to 3 should be planned) . The fact of the matter is that, the people who want rolling releases are tech savvy users and they can very well use a development branch constantly as I do for Fedora. Other users can stick to a release supported for a long time such as RHEL or rebuilds which work fine for regular desktop users really. DKMS is well supported in Fedora although Fedora users would be more used to akmods for kernel drivers which integrates with Fedora kernels in a better way

                          http://fedorasolved.org/Members/zcat/akmods

                          I don't mind a rolling relases method for Fedora but it is silly to imagine this is going to ever go mainstream.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Khudsa View Post
                            Debian SID + aptlist-bugs is like a rolling release, not so update in some packages or slower to deliver some last versions of other packages, but it's good and stable.
                            It's not 'like' a rolling release. It _is_ a rolling release.

                            And a good one at that. I've used it for years before switching to Fedora.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I don't use it anymore (since for some reason I get slow speeds on Wifi) but in regards to release schedule, I liked the way Chakra. They seperate their packages in different repositories and keep the base ones stable (untill it's time for an upgrade) and keep updating the desktop, apps, and games repositories. So it's a semi-rolling distro does, right?

                              Oh, and I also disliked pacman and Appset. Though I loved the AUR and CCR.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X