On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 12:47:53 +0200
Shlomi Fish wrote:
> I would recommend against Arch Linux because, like I said, its
> installations can be left in an unusable state if one forgets to
> update it frequently enough. I'm not sure about Void Linux as I never
> used it.
I had
On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 13:32:20 +0200
Shlomi Fish wrote:
> Sorry for being unclear, but by "unusable state" I meant that one can
> no longer upgrade the system it using "pacman -Syu" (or whatever the
> command is) because it gives errors. The system itself works fine but
> will
>
> I would recommend against Arch Linux because, like I said, its
> installations can be left in an unusable state if one forgets to update
> it frequently enough. I'm not sure about Void Linux as I never used it.
>
That's factually incorrect. If you current state is stable, it will
remain
Hello Yuval,
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Yuval Adam wrote:
>
> >
> > I would recommend against Arch Linux because, like I said, its
> > installations can be left in an unusable state if one forgets to update
> > it frequently enough. I'm not sure about Void Linux as I never
I never said Fedora is unstable!
Arch can be unstable because it try to be on the bleeding edge,
Fedora is "bleeding edge" as far as a stable release can be.
and it has a short release/support cycle.
--
Rabin
On 1 December 2015 at 20:10, Omer Zak wrote:
> Yesterday I posted my
Yesterday I posted my question about selecting a Linux distribution to
serve as the host Linux distribution for a system which runs Docker and
a virtualization system.
For such a system, I'll want to use a stable but up-to-date kernel.
Unstable distributions will be operated inside a virtual
Actually, Debian Testing is a bad alternative when wishing to trade off
stability vs. being up-to-date.
On one hand, while Debian Testing is mostly stable, things break all the
time (and get fixed within few days). Not good when you depend upon a
working system for your work. The worst breakages
I tried to avoid this discussion but I'm a little surprised that nobody
mentioned Debian Testing.
I've used it as a desktop for a decade or so and it had a great combination
of very good stability (i.e. I can't recall it ever disappointed me) and
still relatively up to date.
But then again - it's
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 10:47:32AM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 10:53:09 +0200
> Omer Zak wrote:
>
>
> > For the new system, I'd like to select an host Linux distribution with
> > stable but up-to-date kernel,
One feature that is unique (AFAIR) to Debian
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 10:53:09 +0200
Omer Zak wrote:
> For the new system, I'd like to select an host Linux distribution with
> stable but up-to-date kernel, Docker and a virtualization system
> (VirtualBox or other). For this, Debian Stable (today's Debian
> Jessie) is not the
ith bleeding edge
> > stuff such as new Linux kernel versions, Debian Unstable, GNU/Hurd and
> > other exotic stuff.
> >
> > What is the community's recommendation for a Linux distribution which
> > provides stable yet up-to-date versions of the Linux kernel and the
> >
Gentoo. Kernel is up to date. It has a learning curve, but once you get
used to it, you don't want to go back to other distros. Don't forget it's
compile installation. You can select between systemd or openrc.
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems
Great and fast support of the
t is the community's recommendation for a Linux distribution which
> provides stable yet up-to-date versions of the Linux kernel and the
> other basic software tools?
>
> --- Omer
>
>
___
Linux-il mailing list
Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il
http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
stuff.
What is the community's recommendation for a Linux distribution which
provides stable yet up-to-date versions of the Linux kernel and the
other basic software tools?
--- Omer
--
The key to making programs fast is to make them do practically nothing.
Mike Haertel (original author of GNU
14 matches
Mail list logo