Ubuntu, others) • Stable branch is extremely stable, most users rely on testing/unstable • No “flavors” of Debian per se, but equally capable for many roles • Predictable cycle, stable releases are easy to test beforehand
need general purpose distro • For more specific purposes, Canonical ships more tuned releases • Focus on user-friendly installation and experience • Set-in-stone release cycle means predictable releases (+LTS) Ubuntu
case • All the exciting evolution happens at the fringes! What’s the Distinction? • Nearly all distros branch off dpkg/rpm • Package managers outside the norm grow a whole new ecosystem
is community-managed package repository • Rolling updates means there are no “versions” of Arch • Vanilla package a good base for derivative distributions • Often a good choice if latest software is always needed Arch
◦ Solid reliability takes years, it’s a tradeoff ◦ Time-tested package managers (rpm, deb) are a safe bet ◦ Users have a nice spectrum of latest-shipping distros (i.e., CentOS -> Fedora -> Arch) ◦ Know your (eventual) upgrade plan (CentOS 6 -> 7???)
• Machine use case • Technology decisions • OSS versus commercial ◦ How comfortable are you with a) community support, b) commercial support, c) do-it-yourself? ◦ Licensing: are you compliant? ◦ Free as in beer ≠ free as in speech
▪ Native Linux filesystem ▪ Rapidly stabilizing ◦ ZFS ▪ Adapted from Solaris ▪ Long history ◦ Copy-on-write ◦ Online scrubbing ◦ Snapshots Filesystems file.txt file.txt file.txt sda sdb pool
venerable XFree86 / X.org • Snappy ◦ Ubuntu’s new packaging format • dnf ◦ Red Hat-based distribution next-gen yum • Kernel ◦ Live patching New Core Components