Hacker News Reader

CentOS and RedHat use an essentially ancient kernal, with backported fixes. I roll with OpenSUSE on my laptop, tumbleweed will give you the rolling release with cutting edge packages, or Leap will give you an excellent experience with longer support. In my experience, OpenSUSE also has the best hardware support of any Linux distro.

View on HN

They totally do use old kernels, but in practice I have not run into issues (and almost all my consulting clients were in on CentOS before I started working with them, so the die was mostly cast).

I liked OpenSUSE when I used it. Fedora's the path of least resistance for me. I kinda feel like "Not Ubuntu" is a bigger thing, in 2018, than whether you're in on Fedora or OpenSUSE or Arch or whatever; the tide seems to have turned against it as a server operating system in my neck of the woods and I tend to think you should try to stick at least reasonably close to what you're deploying on.

True, when I hear Ubuntu I'm more likely to double check you really know what your doing.

Not just fixes, but also features. They do this in order to maintain ABI compatibility. Besides, parent was talking about Fedora, which has recent kernels.

The newer kernel features aren't typically as important as stability for production workloads.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com