LiveCode Server on CentOS 6?

[Richard Gaskin]

  Warren Samples wrote:

> On 07/29/2018 07:56 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
>> 
>> First question (an admittedly ignorant one, but I haven't spent much 
>> time in the CentOS community):  Why does their package manager not 
>> automatically keep system components current?
>> 
>> Second question: If the first question cannot be resolved easily, what 
>> is the advantage of CentOS for this project over Ubuntu or Debian?
> 
> Richard,
> 
> The explanation that addresses your first question can be expressed in a 
> very long-winded manner but also boiled down to this: It's RHEL's 
> approach to enforcing stability. They and their clients are interested 
> in a system that gives them no bad surprises. This takes into account 
> the fact that many of those clients are using complicated proprietary 
> software for critical tasks; commercial software and/or software 
> developed in-house, which is expected to be fail-proof. There's is an 
> obviously ultra-conservative approach, but you can't deny they've been 
> successful at what they do :D CentOS naturally inherits the result of 
> this philosophy.

Ubuntu's LTS (Long Term Support) releases serve the same goal, with 
similar methods:  patches are allowed, security patches can be 
automated, but new features are held back until the next LTS release.

It's a tough call, though, with supplemental packages getting long in 
the tooth.  In addition to the potential vulnerabilities, older packages 
can introduce their own compatibility issues, as we've seen here.

I tend to stick with only LTS releases myself, so I appreciate the goals 
with such things.

But unless one is managing a legacy system with known dependencies on 
older packages, using a more recent version would seem a good fit, esp. 
for non-experts, as it establishes a fresh baseline using the latest and 
greatest.

I guess the missing piece of the puzzle here is why his VPS service 
doesn't offer CentOS 7. But as you say:

> Of course the market is open and it's relatively easy to switch hosts. 
> There are several distros that would qualify as reliable enough for 
> server usage including a few that aren't as widely available as the more 
> popular ones. Debian and Ubuntu are totally valid along with CentOS and 
> those are probably the most widely available in hosting packages
-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com                http://www.FourthWorld.com