If we take stability as a parameter, is it safe to match them like this?

  • Fedora --> Ubuntu
  • CentOS Stream --> Ubuntu LTS
  • RHEL --> Debian

I know that CentOS stream is more kind of a rolling release but… feels like an LTS distro in practice… or it is just me?

Edit: adding some context. I am planning to setup a dev machine that I will connect to remotely and would like to babysit very little while having stable and fresh packages. In the Ubuntu world we would go to an LTS release but on the RPM/Dnf world is there any other distro apart from CentOS Stream? And also is CentOS Stream comparable to an LTS release at all considering that they do not have release number?

  • Telorand@reddthat.com
    7·
    1 month ago
    • RHEL is more akin to Ubuntu LTS with a Canonical support contract.
    • CentOS Stream is more like openSUSE Tumbleweed. I’m not aware of any mainstream apt-based distros that have that kind of rolling release cycle.
    • Fedora is like Ubuntu.

    But it’s not really a 1:1 comparison, since they all have different ideologies when it comes to package management and update cycles.

    • Loucypher@lemmy.mlOP
      51·
      1 month ago

      Opensure Tumbleweed is more like Fedora Rawhide, they get the absolute bleeding Edge. CentOS stream is downstream of Fedora, so you get less newer packages

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        4·
        1 month ago

        I disagree, since both Stream and Tumbleweed are rolling releases with solid bases. openSUSE rigorously tests packages before deploying to the stable branch.

        Ultimately, there’s not going to be a perfect analog between all of them, because like I said, they all have different ideologies and packaging goals.