What's the verdict on CentOS...

What's the verdict on CentOS? I'm about to launch a web application (python3/Postgres backend) and I'm debating between using Ubuntu or something RHEL-derived. My workstation runs Fedora and I've found it to be incredibly reliable.

Attached: install-centos-7-logo.png (600x315, 7K)

Ubuntu is for minorities.
Are you one?

I believe it's made exactly for that purpose.
Also some web hosting suites like Plesk will only run on CentOS I think.

And it certainly is reliable.

The only thing I don't like about it is the official repository is very limited.
So you have to add extra repositories or compile yourself, which for someone who's used to Arch feels outdated.

Wouldn't you be more familiar with Centos as a Fedora user? I've always assumed all RedHat stuff was basically the same.

Fedora is testing grounds for CentOS. For RHEL to be precise, but CentOS is a RHEL copy.

That's what I thought.I used Fedora for a while a couple of years ago, I really like the package manager. I just wasn't crazy about the release cycles and having to re-install. Has this changed to your knowledge?

I'm pretty sure you can upgrade in place without reinstalling

>and having to re-install.
Distro-upgrading is very reliable. I've had the same Fedora install since 2015 and it works just fine, in-place upgrading since then.

Hmm.Thanks.Maybe I'll give it a try again soon.

CentOS is pretty good for running that sort of thing.
Ubuntu server...not so much

literally doesn't matter. Alpine is cool so use that.

I used to use RedHat before it became Fedora, and I have positive memories of RPM. How full retard have they gone with all the dbus/systemd/xxxkit stuff these days?

I have the exact opposite memories. I found Debian apt-get to be much more usable than RPM. It's got to be better now.

Love it. Use it for web hosting and on a CI server. Stable af.

To be more precise, my experience was that APT is better than Yum, but RPM is better than dpkg. RPM is not directly comparable to APT.

>my experience was that APT is better than Yum
in what way? In my experience, yum is better than apt. Mainly due to apt's search giving dozens to hundreds of completely unrelated results for a query.

Put your shit in a Docker container and it'll work everywhere.

if you use fedora already just use centos as a debian derivative is just going to annoy you when you come across all the differences in the package manager, different default behaviour and config of just about everything, difference in package naming schemes, etc

rhel/fedora is literally /the/ poettering distro so it's chock-full of dbus/systemd/whatever busllhit
it's probably the best distro for selinux support though, so pros and cons

Well, keep in mind it was like 10 years since I last tried Yum, so it may well have improved by leaps and bounds since. Tbt, I can hardly even remember what I disliked about it. I just recall it not working very well.
Too bad, was kind of hoping I could have the good ol' RHL experience back.
>selinux
Never did enjoy that very much. Seemed like an ugly solution.

>Never did enjoy that very much. Seemed like an ugly solution.
I can get that it's ugly and somewhat polarising but the apparmor approach is fairly simplistic in comparison, but I suppose it depends on what you want out of the system