The Clone Wars – CentOS vs. Scientific Linux

You can read the full review here.

Thanks, good read.

I have one thing I just want to point out about the article, it's this:

Unfortunately, this looks bad, but the page he linked to on the official site hasn't been updated since 2005-11-15 11:29 AM. The forum link draws from the roadmap: https://www.scientificlinux.org/distributions/roadmap

They should really update that page; this is not the first time someone has questioned that area. People have wandered into IRC before asking about that and I just tell them that it's outdated.

I don't read reviews where the reviewer can't distinguish between plurals and posessives even moreso since he/she is "more than a little OCD [himself/herself]".

I don't read reviews where the reviewer can't distinguish between plurals and posessives even moreso since he/she is "more than a little OCD [himself/herself]".

Yeah, I noticed the same thing but I guess I'm just numb to it these days. So many people can't or simply don't proofread anything they post online. Even some articles on big name sites I've seen get posted with bad mistakes.

I don't read reviews where the reviewer can't distinguish between plurals and posessives even moreso since he/she is "more than a little OCD [himself/herself]".

And what color are you painting that bike shed?

Thanks for catching that. It was a last-second rewrite that changed the sentence around and I missed it. Grammar correct.

Flight-data recorder orange, of course!

Seriously, it's a good article. I'm just a bit... well... anal when it comes to those little things.

I don't read reviews where the reviewer can't distinguish between plurals and posessives even moreso since he/she is "more than a little OCD [himself/herself]".

And what color are you painting that bike shed?

Thanks for catching that. It was a last-second rewrite that changed the sentence around and I missed it. Grammar correct.

Are you Jduncan? Welcome to the forum, whether you are or not! The only thing I saw in the posting was about the life cycle. Users know it's the same as RHEL....we've posted the RHEL life cycle on this forum actually.

Nice article

IMHO the title of this article (and of this thread) is totally inappropriate, it suggests that SL and Centos are enemies, which only plays into the hands of real Linux enemies that try to describe the Linux world as being divided into countless rivaling factions that hate each other, which couldn't be further from the truth.

Diversity and choice is a good thing, nature shows that diversity wins, while mono-culture is a dead end.

jamied66, please consider changing the title of your article, it reflects negatively on Linux, it's users and more specifically on both Centos and SL.

While I appreciate the opinion, I would hope (expect?) that the vast majority if not all of the potential readers would get a thinly disguised star wars joke, and not assume a violent exchange were imminent.

One thing that I will say is that the fact that this relatively lightweight post received such heavy traffic is that people are looking for actual comparisons between the various RHEL-derived distributions to aid in their own decision-making.

To that end I'll be reaching out to leaders of each of the identified distros in the next few weeks, as well as doing more intensive testing on my side to try and provide a more empirical comparison between CentOS, SL, and others. If any of the leadership here would like to discuss offline I'd love to have a little QA.

I sincerely think it would benefit all of us. IMHO.

thanks!

-Jamie

I did get the star wars reference, but I still consider the title inappropriate as it focuses on a rivalry that simply isn't there.

I like the article itself, I just don't like the title at all.

After installing SL6, I have a few questions that I'd LOVE someone more familiar with the distribution to offer their opinions on.

If you're interested take a look at the continuation of the conversation at http://lostinopensource.wordpress.com/2011/07/23/clone-wars-2-revenge-of-the-install-dvds/

yes, i totally kept the star wars bit going. </gong>

I read it quickly....it's the weekend, so things around here can be slow...but which install DVD did you use for SL?

http://ftp1.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/6.0/x86_64/iso/

Also, the 'autoupdate' feature only notifies you of updates based on the repo's of course you have open. It doesn't automatically install them. These settings can of course be changed.

Also, you didn't mention that SL 6 has a six month headstart on CentOS 6. All of us around here (save 5.x users) are going to be using SL 6.1 final in about a week to 10 days, so that review will be antiquated rather quickly.

I'm sure others will chime in here, guaranteed

PS: Did you install SL's "yum configuration" under SL Addons in the GUI Package Manager?

I used the images downloaded from:

http://ftp1.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/6.0/x86_64/iso/SL-60-x86_64-2011-03-03-Everything-DVD1.iso

and then of course http://ftp1.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/6.0/x86_64/iso/SL-60-x86_64-2011-03-03-Everything-DVD2.iso

I selected the absolute defaults. I didn't do any package customization.

Of course I understand that you can disable the yum autoupdater, I'm curious at this point why SL decided to have it enabled by default. And of course, the other questions I noted.

I'm not touching the "who's doing it faster" game with a ten foot pole.

I used the images downloaded from:

http://ftp1.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/6.0/x86_64/iso/SL-60-x86_64-2011-03-03-Everything-DVD1.iso

and then of course http://ftp1.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/6.0/x86_64/iso/SL-60-x86_64-2011-03-03-Everything-DVD2.iso

I selected the absolute defaults. I didn't do any package customization.

Of course I understand that you can disable the yum autoupdater, I'm curious at this point why SL decided to have it enabled by default. And of course, the other questions I noted.

I'm not touching the "who's doing it faster" game with a ten foot pole.

I will because that's the most important part. Why do you think most of us are here? Reaction time to security issues is important to us, as well as staying up date.

I agree, in fact that is by far the most important factor.

We are talking about clones here, the other tiny differences are completely irrelevant in practice, what counts is being able to rely on timely security and bug fix updates, that's what really sets them apart.

I agree, in fact that is by far the most important factor.

We are talking about clones here, the other tiny differences are completely irrelevant in practice, what counts is being able to rely on timely security and bug fix updates, that's what really sets them apart.

I don't consider CentOS / SL RHEL "clones" at this point, after looking deeper into the communities over the past few weeks. Derived from RHEL, sure, but each take their own ideas and fold them into their distribution. With SL, for example, leaving out the ABRT is still a puzzler for me.

As for the "security updates in a timely manner" discussion, I commend your community on working out the 6.0 builds as quickly as you did. But what happened to 5.6? CentOS came out with 5.6 2 months ahead of SL. It was more a matter of priorities, I think, than abilities within either community. That's why I don't think it's the right discussion to have.

If anyone has metrics on how fast various communities come out with updates from the RHEL sources, it'd be interesting, maybe. I just don't have the time/setup to calculate that right now.

Scientific Linux 5.6 was being used by users 2 months ahead of CentOS's 5.6 release in April....they had (5.x) it on a "rolling" cycle. They did an "official" live release in June of this year.

6.0 was released six months ahead of CentOS, and 6 months behind RHEL. This was a milestone most of us were waiting waiting for because of the vastly improved support for modern hardware.

I can't see comparing a point release to a major release. Go read the "CentOS Refugees" thread in Anything Goes and you'll find out why almost all of us are former CentOS users. In fact, this entire Forum is borne out of dissatisfaction!

Thread closed (by no fault of Jamie). Take it up HERE. as this is a better place to continue the discussion.