I agree with mike upgrading can be very tedious. But I do not think that installing archlinux is less tedious. On Aug 20, 2012 9:38 PM, "mike cloaked" <mike.cloa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Karel Volný <kvo...@redhat.com> wrote: > > yes, it's a shame that someone is unwilling to upgrade to F17 :-) > > > > K. > > That is a pretty snotty remark and very unwarranted. F16 is a > currently supported version of Fedora until about November. If you > are the owner of a single machine then a re-install is tedious but not > too time-consuming every 6 months. If you are the admin for a dozen > machines or more then re-installing all of them every 6 months is a > pretty tedious business - and like quite a few other people I > re-install usually annually on the majority of Fedora machines for > that reason. > > For quite a lot of other people a rolling release distribution makes > less work when maintaining a significant number of machines - and > indeed I am moving my machines progressively over to a rolling release > distribution for that reason. I now get to be more up to date than > current Fedora on those machines running the rolling release > distribution. So even if I was running F17 I would not be as up to > date as Archlinux for this particular package set. > > We all have choices - and I asked a simple and perfectly valid > question - your kind of reply can lead to bad feeling on a list like > this! > > -- > mike c > -- > test mailing list > test@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
-- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
