<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/23/2013 09:29 AM, leam hall
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACv9p5o23=3UpNN5hX3GQJvvmqS5ptVmCDK4K0FWDVY5=WGsQQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Fedora is branching into it's own beast and losing any
relevance to those of us who like Red Hat. With the LTS option,
Ubuntu is making itself worth a look. From what I can tell, a lot
of web based startups are preferring Ubuntu to CentOS/RHEL. No one
seems to like Fedora.</blockquote>
<br>
The only things I don't like about Fedora are things I also do not
like about Red Hat. Otherwise, it's just another Linux system with
upstream-provided default configuration, like any other. :-)<br>
<br>
Honestly, if they'd just refactor the package management to be a lot
more efficient than it currently is, it'd be just about perfect. As
it is, they've been layering things on top of rpm since the
mid-1990s, and it shows; running yum on an Rπ is an exercise in
hardcore patience. Even on my hexacore system with 8 GiB of RAM and
3 GHz per core, yum is <i>horribly</i> slow.<br>
<br>
There are some other packagers that have done part, but not all, of
what is needed.<br>
<br>
For the record, I'm not goo-goo for dpkg/apt, either. I think it's
easier to work with, and it sure seems most of the time to be far
faster, but it has downsides that the RH tools have not.<br>
<br>
Another project I don't have the time to do, but would love to work
on someday. *shrug*<br>
<br>
— Mike<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<table border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td> <img src="cid:part1.03070409.03060709@naunetcorp.com"
alt="Naunet Corporation Logo"> </td>
<td> Michael B. Trausch<br>
<br>
President, <strong>Naunet Corporation</strong><br>
☎ (678) 287-0693 x130 or (855) NAUNET-1 x130<br>
FAX: (678) 783-7843<br>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</body>
</html>