On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 09:48:20PM +0100, Benny Amorsen wrote: > RHEL and its derivatives, just like SUSE and Debian Stable, are > comparatively conservative. I need e.g. working QinQ, and that means > a 2.6.23 kernel. There's also a lot of software missing in RHEL -- > like OpenSwan and Asterisk. For the latter you can use EPEL (but not all is there yet, of course). The first is true, but IMHO being (more) conservative in related to having a LTS release, so I don't see that much difference between a suggested Fedora LTS and RHEL/CentOS. > If you update and add components to RHEL, you're going to lose out on > support, as far as I know. (If I'm wrong and some enterprise distro Yes, but, comparing apples with apples, Fedora LTS would have no (official) support too, just like CentOS (in all cases I ignore third party support). > maker is willing to offer support for OpenSwan and kernel 2.6.23, I'd > be very happy to hear about it.) Yes, but this sounds a bit like wanting to have a bleeding-edge distro, with a huge amount of packages, and with long time support. Good luck finding a company wanting to build/maintain such a distro ;-). -- -- Jos Vos <jos@xxxxxx> -- X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV | Phone: +31 20 6938364 -- Amsterdam, The Netherlands | Fax: +31 20 6948204 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
