Ask Your Question
0

What do you guys think about an LTS version for Fedora? [closed]

asked 2018-11-01 07:58:08 -0500

ervinfdine gravatar image

I just installed Fedora 29. While Fedora 29 is wonderful and I have had a very good experience with it so far, I have a concern. As we all know Fedora's lifetime is about 13 months. After that you have to upgrade. It is not a problem for me to upgrade or re-install. So I personally have no issue with that. As long as these upgrades do not break important things, I am OK with them. The issue is installing Fedora on my parents computer or friends computers who are not very computer savvy. They have to rely on me to upgrade the system for them. And I may not always be available. Now one can use CentOS, CentOS is very good, very stable and it has the longest LTS support of any release that I know. With third party repositories such as Epel, Nux and Rpmfusion you can add the number of available packages for CentOS, especially desktop packages.But sometimes third party repositories are not enough and they often conflict with each other or may overwrite the CentOS stable base. That is why I thought maybe a Fedora LTS could be a good idea, or a Fedora rolling release, or both. Maybe Rawhide can be turned into a rolling release and Fedora Stable into an LTS release. We could perhaps use Firefox ESR instead of the regular Firefox, LibreOffice still instead of lLibreOffice fresh, the latest LTS kernel instead of the regular stable kernel, the LTS version of KDE and packages in a stable state. This is just an idea. Of course I don't want to stop Fedora's momentum in being at the forefront of the new technologies, but maybe Rawhide can serve a better purpose for that. Or we could make a desktop version of CentOS by adding a repository that brings just about enough desktop packages to CentOS without having to overwrite the base of the system, such as for example the CentOS default kernel. Epel is doing such a job, but there are still many packages missing, it has a much lower number of packages that Fedora has. Surely you can build packages for CentOS yourself, but I don't have that skill and for sure less savvy users don't have that skill. So please give me your take on my idea, Best, Ervin

edit retag flag offensive reopen merge delete

Closed for the following reason the question is answered, right answer was accepted by FranciscoD_
close date 2018-11-17 11:58:57.762598

Comments

I'm closing this question. Please join the discussion that's happening on the community channels as pointed out in the answer. (Ask Fedora is not a discussion forum, it's merely a Q&A site for people to ask questions on)

FranciscoD_ gravatar imageFranciscoD_ ( 2018-11-17 11:58:38 -0500 )edit

2 Answers

Sort by ยป oldest newest most voted
1

answered 2018-11-17 06:49:21 -0500

florian gravatar image

updated 2018-11-17 16:32:07 -0500

Did you see the discussion on that topic with Fedora Project Lead? https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/...

edit flag offensive delete link more
1

answered 2018-11-01 10:00:30 -0500

Panther gravatar image

updated 2018-11-01 10:08:21 -0500

For better or worse, RHEL / Centos is considered the "LTS" version of Fedora.

"LTS" have advantages and disadvantages as you point out, the packages in "LTS" are more tested/stable, but they are not the latest, and you would have the same problems with a Fedora "LTS" you have with Ubuntu or Centos, stale packages, by definition.

A partial solution, for either,

With RHEL / Centos use the COPR system (has some updated packages)

https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/

https://www.centos.org/forums/viewtop...

For Fedora, update every other release, from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DNF_sy...

The most common scenario is an upgrade across just one release (e.g. Fedora 28 to Fedora 29). However, for the first month or so after a new release comes out, upgrades from the last-but-one release to that release are 'supported', in the sense that we include this scenario in the Fedora Release Criteria, test it for at least clean installs of supported package sets, and will treat bugs discovered in such upgrades as significant. The Fedora Release Life Cycle is specifically designed to provide this approximate one month 'grace period' so you can choose to upgrade long-lived systems only once every two releases, rather than having to do it every release.

FWIW, if you wait a few weeks before you upgrade, for the most part, upgrades are very smooth.

Other than those options, my guess is most fedora users have a love hate relationship with the rapid development / release cycle of fedora and it is unlikely you could get a community consensus for a fedora "LTS", but you can try.

edit flag offensive delete link more

Comments

I think you would be better served by installing a different distribution on friends and family computers.

Glenn gravatar imageGlenn ( 2018-11-02 03:35:14 -0500 )edit

You have misunderstood me. My issue is not having the latest packages. My less savvy computer friend, or even I can live with an outdated version of LibreOffice for instance as long as it is stable. I am pointing out to two problems. One is maintaining Fedora on the computer of a less savvy user who would have to re-install once a year, or upgrade. The other, if CentOS is the LTS version of Fedora, it is a poor substitute for one reason, lack of desktop packages. CentOS otherwise is wonderful and stable. I don't mind if some packages in it are outdated.

ervinfdine gravatar imageervinfdine ( 2018-11-02 13:47:49 -0500 )edit
1

You can skip releases , see the link I gave you.

Panther gravatar imagePanther ( 2018-11-02 15:00:22 -0500 )edit

Anyway thank you Panther

ervinfdine gravatar imageervinfdine ( 2018-11-02 17:03:51 -0500 )edit

Please note that the upgrade process has improved and is now an important part of the release criteria. So, one doesn't need to reinstall frequently (I haven't reinstalled in years now).

FranciscoD_ gravatar imageFranciscoD_ ( 2018-11-04 07:38:37 -0500 )edit

Question Tools

1 follower

Stats

Asked: 2018-11-01 07:58:08 -0500

Seen: 351 times

Last updated: Nov 17 '18