Mike McCarty <mike.mccarty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I am doing contract work, and was requested to install FC2
> on my machine (last October). Since doing that, I have
> tentatively concluded that the Fedora Core Project is
> more or less beta test, and not really suitable for
> development work. Please anyone correct me if I am wrong.
First off, understand Fedora Core 2 was a "new version." It
was a radical change from Red Hat Linux 8, 9 and Fedora Core
1 which made up the previous version. Fedora Core 3 is far
more reliable, because it is the next revision of the same
version as Fedora Core 2.
It's like saying Red Hat Linux 7.2 is beta based on only
using Red Hat Linux 7.0, Red Hat Linux 5.2 is beta based on
only using Red Hat Linux 5.0, etc... Revisions meant
everything in Red Hat Linux, and I now they are gone with
Fedora Core.
So it's not that you are "wrong," it's more like "you weren't
warned." With Fedora Core, they've taken away revisioning,
so there's just no way to know.
I purposely did _not_ upgrade to Fedora Core 2 from Fedora
Core 1 until Fedora Core 3 was almost out, and in some cases,
I waited on Fedora Core 3. Same deal now for Fedora Core 4,
I'm waiting on Fedora Core 5 instead, sticking with Fedora
Core 3 for now.
It's no different than when people waited for Red Hat Linux
5.1, Red Hat Linux 7.1, Red Hat Linux 9 (being the next
revision after 8), etc... You almost _never_ run the "first
.0 revision" of any new 6-month Red Hat release.
> So I am considering a hop to a more stable environment.
Fedora Core 3 is typically a "yum upgrade" away. Just
install the new "fedora-release" RPM for Fedora Core 3 and
run "yum upgrade" (not "yum update"). There can be a few
issues, but for the most part, it works well.
> Since CentOS is akin to The Product Produced By A Major
> Vendor Of Linux Software Who Shall Remain Nameless,
So is Fedora Core. Make no mistake, the people paid by Red
Hat who work on Red Hat Enterprise Linux packages _also_
maintain the _same_ Fedora Core packages. Red Hat Enterprise
Linux is just what we get after several revisions of Fedora
Core, and the focus is far more static when they do.
If Red Hat didn't pay people to work on Fedora Core as part
of their regular function for Red Hat Enterprise Linux, as
the quality of the former suffers, so would the latter.
Because Red Hat Enterprise Linux is the 18-month version,
based on the 2-3 revisions of the 6-month released Red Hat
distribution fka Red Hat Linux now Fedora Core.
Most of the early naysayers on Fedora Core have been silenced
by the quality of Fedora Core 1 and, even more so, Fedora
Core 3. Fedora Core 5 should be an improvement from Fedora
Core 4, just as Fedora Core 2 was.
> I was wondering if the transition might be easier to CentOs
> rather than, say Debian. (Makes me feel like I'm reading a
> Harry Potter novel about He Who Shall Not Be Named.)
Oh, definitely. I maintain Debian and Gentoo systems, but if
you're coming from a Red Hat distro, RHEL/CentOS is virtually
*0* change from RHL/FC.
> Is there any reasonable hope of an "upgrade" from FC2 to
> CentOS 4.1 or should/must I backup, install, and restore?
You'd want to upgrade to FC3 before attempting an upgrade to
RHEL/CentOS. The latter are _subsets_ in packages compared
to the former, so you're going to have issues.
--
Bryan J. Smith | Sent from Yahoo Mail
mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx | (please excuse any
http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ | missing headers)
