Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Mon, 15 Dec 2014 08:59:59 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
You probably should use the November 30, 2020 date instead of the 2023 date for replacement planning purposes.
There might be some embedded distros with longer LTS, but I am not aware of any general purpose desktop or server distro with a longer LTS than Redhat EL and distros based off of it.
Your best bet might be to find a new laptop over the coming years. The chrome pixel isn't 3x4, but it's closer than many wide laptops and a decent compromise.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/chromebooks.html#pixel
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Keith Lofstrom" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 5:29:49 AM
> Subject: Longest LTS - still SL/RHEL?
>
> I was sad to learn that there will not be a 32 bit version of
> SL7 / RHEL7 . I run older T60 laptops with 3x4 aspect ratio
> screens, and have a stockpile of spares and screens and keyboards
> that should last a long time. I dislike "runt screen" AKA wide
> screen displays. However, my venerable laptops use 32 bit
> processors.
>
> I hope to have enough 3x4 goodness to last as long as I do, and
> machines that will keep working for my wife (and her business) who
> will likely outlive me. However, Redhat stops providing security
> support of the 6 series of distros after 2023. I love the SL
> community, and would love to keep upgrading SL distros forever,
> and also keep using the old 32 bit machines, but it appears that
> I must give up one or the other soon, or deal with some big
> changes when I no longer have the ability to adapt to them.
>
> Are there other distros with even longer LTS policies than SL and
> RHEL? Is there some way to keep supporting SL6x with security
> updates long after RH stops providing them? Some in our community
> may have built measurement systems around 32 bit CPUs that must
> keep collecting data far into the future - what is the plan?
>
> Keith
>
> --
> Keith Lofstrom [log in to unmask]
>
|
|
|