I have to say, this is why I switched *away* from gentoo. It seemed like a good idea at first, but I got tired of being surprised far too often by someone deciding to make changes that required my attention. A lot of the changes seemed to be of the class "wouldn't the piano.config look better over there?" and "let's invent a new way of doing something that works fine now".I have to throw my 2 cents worth in. I have to agree that doing a full upgrade every 6-8 months gets tiresome when you have a dozen or so machines running it. However, preupgrade does seem to help that a lot and it's getting better with oddball setups like some I have. That said, rolling updates are the way to go. No need for continual upgrades to 'releases' just update to the latest version of a package and be done with it. I'm just not sure a 'major release' design is the way to go any longer. With internet access the way it is, why not just do rolling updates? Personally this is why I use gentoo more and more. No need to download an ISO or anything of the sort, just switch to a new profile, update the needed packages and you are at the latest 'release'. Then, update packages as they are released as stable. (or as ~arch in the gentoo world). Nothing else makes as much sense to me in the open source world that isn't a 'paid' or 'enterprise' edition.
If you're looking for a system that requires less of your time to manage than Fedora, I suspect you'll discover you've gone in the opposite direction with gentoo.
With virtualization support as good as it is these days, I'm leaning towards installing each successive release in a new VM and migrating my various services over to it before decommissioning the previous VM. In theory, anyway. I haven't tried it in practice yet.
Wayne.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
