Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

better stability & security

Rolling release is good for

Rolling release is good for one reason. You get the full security and bug fix updates as intended by upstream.

No amount of backporting fixes is enough to keep a system secure and bug free. It's as simple as that. If I backport fixes from kernel git tree to a stable kernel 2.6.2x release, I'm most likely going to miss a lot of fixes. Cherry picking fixes for popular bugs only isn't a solution and causes weakness in Static release distributions.

The only requirement for a rolling release to work is to keep the base system as simple as possible. Theoretically, no downstream patching should be done in packages such as glibc, gcc or kernel unless it is a patch waiting to be eventually merged in a future upstream release.

re: poll

For servers - Static release/repo.

The "theory" of rolling releases is great, but the real world application, not so much.

Servers MUST be stable and secure. With a rolling release, you rely too much on the upstream vendor not to fubar something your system must have (not that it can't be done - mainframes have been doing rolling upgrades for decades - it's just EXPENSIVE to do it right).

RHEL/CENTOS has the right business model. Forget the fluff (and or bleeding edge stuff), only put well tested software into their repo's, backport security as needed, and support the whole thing for 5 years (or longer for security patches)

Of course it doesn't really matter what method the upstream vendor uses, you still need to run a parallel test environment along side your production environment, and test everything (and I mean EVERYTHING) in the first before rolling it out on the second.

It's just easier (for me anyways) to plan your server environments (and their future) if you have static (but not the ridiculously short 6 month timeframe) releases.

Which would you say is better for a linux server?

I have heard the topic discussed in various forums and points of view.

Which would you say is the better choice for a linux based server?

Please give reasoning for your answers and not post "sux" or "rules" nonsense.

Big Bear

More in Tux Machines

Samsung Officially Launches their Tizen Curved SUHD 4K TVs in the Philippines

The new line of Tizen 4K Samsung SUHD TVs has now officially been launched in the Philippines at an event held a few days ago. The new line-up of TVs includes the JS9500, JS9000 and JS8500 models, supporting screen sizes ranging from 55 to 88 inches. Samsung boasts that their TV technology, which uses nano-crystal semiconductors, leads in color and brightness compared to its competitors. Read more

Cloudsto X86 Nano PC is a tiny desktop with Ubuntu Linux (or Windows)

The folks at UK retailer Cloudsto have been offering tiny desktop computers loaded with Ubuntu Linux for a little while. But most have basically been Ubuntu versions of existing Android boxes with ARM-based processors. Now Cloudsto is introducing a line of mini PCs with x86 processors, starting with the Cloudsto X86 Nano Mini PC. It’s available with either Windows 8.1 or Ubuntu 14.04. Read more

EMC to open-source ViPR - and lots of other stuff apparently

ViPR is software storage controller tech that separates the control and data planes of operation, enabling different data services to be layered onto a set of storage hardware products - such as EMC's own arrays, Vblocks, selected third-party arrays, JBODs and cloud storage. The data services are typically ways of accessing data, such as file services, The open source software will be called Project CoprHD* and be made available on GitHub for community development. It will include all the storage automation and control functionality and be supplied under the Mozilla Public License 2.0 (MPL 2.0). Public supporting partners for CoprHD are Intel, Verizon and SAP. Read more