[ale] ubuntu versus fedora

[Michael Trausch]

On Sat, 2010-04-17 at 18:39 -0400, Brian Pitts wrote:
> At least they have a public release schedule and stick to it, unlike
>  Red Hat. Having regular releases every six months that are supported
>  for 18 months and long term releases every two years that are
>  supported for five years is great, IMHO 

Absolutely.  It is one of the reasons that I use it on servers that I
run.  Anything that's not new enough for what I have to do, I just build
from source code anyway (and surprisingly, I don't usually have to
rebuild every time the system is dist-upgraded, though I do anyway).  I
was hoping that wouldn't be the case for Lucid, since I use Samba 3.5,
but they are still using 3.4.  Oh, well.

Despite there being 5 years of updates (on the server, anyway), I will
usually upgrade the servers that I keep running an LTS about four to six
months after the release of the next LTS.  So, all my systems that are
running Hardy on the server (still have like 3 of those) will be
upgraded to Lucid probably by the time Maverick is released.

	--- Mike

-- 
Even if their crude and anticompetitive business practices don't make
you think about using their software, their use of sweatshops and child
labor should:  boycott Microsoft like you would any other amoral child
abuser:  http://is.gd/btW8m