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

BeagleBone Announces the Open Source PocketBeagle USB-Key-Fob SBC

  • BeagleBone Announces the Open Source PocketBeagle USB-Key-Fob SBC
    You've probably heard of BeagleBones and the Beagleboard Foundation by now (check out that link if you're not familiar with them). They make open source SBCs and have an online community much like the Raspberry Pi Foundation. While Beaglebones don't have as large of a community or market share as Raspberry Pi, their boards are still quite popular because they tend to be more application-focused than Raspberry Pis. For example, there's the general-purpose Beaglebone Black, the sensor-oriented Beaglebone Green, and the Beaglebone Blue for robotics applications.
  • What is PocketBeagle?

today's howtos

Graphics: NVIDIA, Nouveau, X.Org Server

  • NVIDIA Making Progress On Server-Side GLVND: Different Drivers For Different X Screens
    While NVIDIA isn't doing much to help out Nouveau, at least the company is contributing to the open-source Linux graphics ecosystem in other ways. In addition to presenting at XDC2017 this week on the Unix device memory allocator API and DeepColor / HDR support, they also presented on server-side GLVND. Server-side GLVND is separate from the client-side GLVND (OpenGL Vendor Neutral Dispatch Library) that evolved over the past few years and with modern Linux systems is supported both by Mesa and the NVIDIA binary driver. Server-side GLVND can help PRIME laptops and other use-cases like XWayland where potentially dealing with multiple GPU drivers touching X.
  • Nouveau Developers Remain Blocked By NVIDIA From Advancing Open-Source Driver
    Longtime Nouveau contributors Martin Peres and Karol Herbst presented at this week's XDC2017 X.Org conference at the Googleplex in Mountain View. It was a quick talk as they didn't have a whole lot to report on due to their open-source NVIDIA "Nouveau" driver efforts largely being restricted by NVIDIA Corp.
  • X.Org Server 1.20 Expected Around January With New Features
    X.Org Server 1.19 is already almsot one year old and while X.Org is currently well off its six month release cadence, version 1.20 is being figured out for an early 2018 release. Adam Jackson of Red Hat who has been serving as the xorg-server release manager held a quick session on Friday at XDC2017 to figure out what's needed for X.Org Server 1.20. His goal is to see X.Org Server 1.20 released in time for making the Fedora 28 version. For that to happen nicely, he's hoping to see xorg-server 1.20 released in January. The Fedora 28 beta freeze is the middle of March so there is still time for the 1.20 release to slip while making the F28 Linux distribution update.

ASUS Launches Its Thinnest and Lightest Flippable Chromebook, the Flip C101

ASUS announced a new Chromebook on its website, the Flip C101, which is a smaller and lightweight version of the C302 model. Featuring a 10.1-inch touchscreen display, the all-new Chromebook is priced at only $299 in the US. Read more