Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

better stability & security

Rolling release/repo
73% (183 votes)
Static release/repo
27% (67 votes)
Total votes: 250

Rolling release is good for

Rolling release is good for one reason. You get the full security and bug fix updates as intended by upstream.

No amount of backporting fixes is enough to keep a system secure and bug free. It's as simple as that. If I backport fixes from kernel git tree to a stable kernel 2.6.2x release, I'm most likely going to miss a lot of fixes. Cherry picking fixes for popular bugs only isn't a solution and causes weakness in Static release distributions.

The only requirement for a rolling release to work is to keep the base system as simple as possible. Theoretically, no downstream patching should be done in packages such as glibc, gcc or kernel unless it is a patch waiting to be eventually merged in a future upstream release.

re: poll

For servers - Static release/repo.

The "theory" of rolling releases is great, but the real world application, not so much.

Servers MUST be stable and secure. With a rolling release, you rely too much on the upstream vendor not to fubar something your system must have (not that it can't be done - mainframes have been doing rolling upgrades for decades - it's just EXPENSIVE to do it right).

RHEL/CENTOS has the right business model. Forget the fluff (and or bleeding edge stuff), only put well tested software into their repo's, backport security as needed, and support the whole thing for 5 years (or longer for security patches)

Of course it doesn't really matter what method the upstream vendor uses, you still need to run a parallel test environment along side your production environment, and test everything (and I mean EVERYTHING) in the first before rolling it out on the second.

It's just easier (for me anyways) to plan your server environments (and their future) if you have static (but not the ridiculously short 6 month timeframe) releases.

Which would you say is better for a linux server?

I have heard the topic discussed in various forums and points of view.

Which would you say is the better choice for a linux based server?

Please give reasoning for your answers and not post "sux" or "rules" nonsense.

Big Bear

More in Tux Machines

Wine 2.7 Has Been Released

Canonical Releases Snapd 2.25 Snappy Daemon for Ubuntu Linux, Here Is What's New

Canonical's Snappy team, through Michael Vogt, announced today, April 28, 2017, the release and immediate availability of the Snapd 2.25 Snappy daemon for all supported Ubuntu Linux OSes, as well as other GNU/Linux distributions. Read more

Ubuntu Devs Work on Rebasing Ubuntu 17.10 (Artful Aardvark) to Linux Kernel 4.11

It looks like the Ubuntu Kernel team is back at work after taking a short break, and they recently published another installation of their bi-weekly newsletter to inform the Ubuntu Linux community about what to expect in the coming weeks. Read more

Linux Mint-using terror nerd awaits sentence for training Islamic State

A paranoid Welsh Muslim who wore gloves while typing on his laptop, admitted being part of Islamic State, and, gasp, harbored a copy of Linux Mint, has been described as a “new and dangerous breed of terrorist.” Samata Ullah, 34, who also used voice modulation software to disguise his thick Welsh accent while making instructional videos about encryption, pleaded guilty to five terrorism charges at Cardiff Crown Court. He was due to be sentenced Friday afternoon. Read more