Les Mikesell wrote:
> However which release it is going to be, isn't known in
advance since RHEL release schedules aren't known in advance.
Even if it is, RHEL is not always a snapshot of some Fedora release.
So far the surprises have been rare.
That's not a real answer. Whether it is rare or not, is has occurred and
you need to have a plan to deal with that.
Sometimes it is earlier than a release. There is also the case of
Fedora updates moving past RHEL like FC6 updates did.
That's something that could be fixed. How hard is it to not update
something?
Pretty hard actually. You can't stagnate a released distribution for
obvious reasons. FC6 is released. It has to be updated to include
security fixes, bug fixes ... RHEL 5 has branched off but it would take
another six months (internal testing, alpha, beta, partner testing etc)
or so even before it is released. Remember, nobody in the Fedora world
know the exact schedule in advance so they can't plan for it.
RHEL also makes a number of configuration changes and there are
dependency differences between them as a result. How do you account
for all that differences in updates? Fedora includes about 5 times
more software packages than RHEL. What about security updates for all
those software that is in Fedora but not in RHEL ? That gap continues
to increase as well since the Fedora repository continues to grow at a
rapid rate while RHEL repository size don't grow that much.
Aren't those mostly in EPEL?
You have completely ignored the point of configuration and dependency
differences which means you can't just use the same stream of updates
from RHEL in Fedora as you think you can.
Fedora and EPEL package count don't match at all. Go ahead and compare.
Or, since we are talking about the next
version, aren't they expected to be in EPEL? Or should people not be
using them when planning projects that will run on enterprise versions?
Fedora still has way more packages than RHEL + EPEL and since you have
to find maintainers and the upstream versions might depend on newer
versions of software only available in the latest Fedora (remember EPEL
packages cannot conflict with what is available in base RHEL), some will
not build for a earlier version available in RHEL and the problem gets
progressively worse as more versions of Fedora get much ahead of RHEL.
> But the point is that whatever RHEL does, I wish the fedora release
>that spawned it would do the same
What the advantage of cloning the same thing twice?
There's no additional human effort in cloning. What's the point of
having software licenses that permit re-use if in fact you don't reuse
it once you get it right?
That wasn't my question. My question is why not just use RHEL or CentOS
if you just going to duplicate the same stream of updates for Fedora as
well? It just seems busy work for no benefit.
Rahul
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
