[SATLUG] Fedora 9

John Pappas j at jvpappas.net
Fri May 16 17:01:18 CDT 2008

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Daniel Givens <daniel at rugmonster.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 12:27 AM, luis <luis at luisgarza.com> wrote:
>> As a server, I don't trust it just yet.  I installed the server and I
>> needed a ton of updates.

No OS has overcome the problem of updates.  Remember that unlike other
platforms, the "Update" methodology includes a MUCH wider range of
software, including the Kernel, Drivers, Compilers, Userspace
programs, server programs (webservers, file servers, FTP, LDAP, etc),
and all the other stuff installed on the box.  Most other "update"
methodologies are far less capable: ie in Windows, WSUS only does the
OS, every other installed app/driver/etc has a separate update
methodology (Reinstall, Check for updates, beg/pray, pay, etc), and
usually the "owner" has to remember to run each separately (PITA).
Even though there are "a ton", it is far better than "a ton all over
the place in 6 different GUI management tools"

> Why are the number of updates bad? I would be worried if I installed
> any release of Linux in any flavor older than three months and didn't
> get more than a handful of updates.

Agreed.  With the scope of capabilities available and the granularity
of control, there better be a non-trivial number of updates.  In a
monopolistic OS, the vendor has the "luxury" of rolling up the
"Updates" into few packages or service packs/releases, and again the
scope is smaller, thus the number of updates is also.

After reading this post over, I am not sure that I properly conveyed
my message, but I hope that I came close.

More information about the SATLUG mailing list