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

Security Leftovers

Leftovers: Gaming

openSUSE 42.2 Alpha1, Not Just for Nerds, Rebellin Impressin'

Today in Linux news Ludwig Nussel announced the release of openSUSE Leap 42.2 Alpha1. In other news, Jack Germain was impressed with Rebellin Linux from the start and blogger DarkDuck said CentOS isn't for home users. Mozilla' Asa Dotzler returns to Firefox and Richard Smith said Linux is "not just for computer nerds" anymore. Ludwig Nussel today announced openSUSE Leap 42.2 Alpha1 saying this release is mainly 42.1 plus updates and SLE12SP2 Beta1, Qt 5.6, and Linux 4.4. He hopes another alpha will land before the upcoming openSUSE conference and having a developmental release every month until Final in November. Test hounds can still check the installer and hardware support. While 42.2 is supposed to be a minor update, big changes are coming in YaST, X, KDE, GNOME and systemd. Read more

Is Ubuntu's Convergence the Future of Linux?

Convergence is not a word on everybody's lips. But if Canonical Software, the company that controls Ubuntu, has any say, it soon will be. Others may be more skeptical. Canonical describes convergence as "a single software platform that runs across smartphones, tablets, PCs, and TVs. It is designed to help make converged computing a reality: one system, one experience, multiple form factors." Read more