Re: [Evolution] Evolution not starting (SanthanaKrishnan)

[Pete Biggs <pete biggs org uk>]

On Tue, 2015-01-13 at 10:03 -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-01-13 at 11:26 +0000, Tom, Yahoo wrote: 
> > However, i still find it very odd that Evo people have been
> > recommending Ubuntu.  So far each different person's has recommended 2
> > or 3 distros with Ubuntu being in each different list.  Usually people
> > on this mailing list seem to be quite scathing or even hostile to
> > Ubuntu so i was hoping to see more suggestions for other distros to
> > see what people do like.
>
> I am hostile to Ubuntu, it is a distributions with just lousy QC.  But
> that doesn't stop anyone from using it.

I agree 100%.  The only reason I mentioned Ubuntu at all was because the
OP said that that was what they were being advised to go to.  Many
people see Linux as a "hobbyist" OS - it's not! - but I would consider
Ubuntu to be amongst the most hobbyist-like distros around.  Personally,
I would not advise the use of Ubuntu in an office environment -
certainly not in it's out-of-box state.

> As I said, I use, and I recommend, openSUSE for a desktop/laptop
> use-case.  And I use Evolution, all day every day, so I can speak to
> that specific package.
>
> > CentOS is same family as Fedora isn't it? 

Sort of.  CentOS is a clone of the commercial RedHat Enterprise Linux.
Fedora is a RedHat sponsored project to produce a bleeding-edge distro
and RedHat use it as a testing/proving ground for things that may, or
may not, end up in RHEL.  Every couple of years Fedora goes into a sort
of freeze - i.e. not as many new things are included, there's a big push
on bug fixes and so on - the resulting Fedora version is then used as
the loose base for the next RHEL release.

RHEL is not an exact match though to a Fedora version - there are things
in RHEL that were never in Fedora (mainly commercial enterprise things)
- and similarly, CentOS isn't an exact match to RHEL either in that some
things retain RH copyright and CentOS doesn't get access to RHN.

> Yes, and no.  Fedora is a developer distribution, it is very Upstream.
> CentOS is far down stream.  

I might have put it that Fedora is the "developing" distro and RHEL is
the "developed" version.  RHEL/CentOS is very, very stable.

> >  So that might be
> > advantageous for command-line stuff?  Scientific Linux is in the same
> > family (Redhat family) as CentOS that no-one has mentioned but i
> > thought had a good reputation.

Scientific Linux is also a clone of RHEL.  CentOS tries to keep as close
as possible to RHEL whereas SL changes some of the packages to more
recent versions - mainly scientific/computation resources, which isn't
surprising as it's the distro originally developed and used by CERN but
now supported by Fermilab and is tailored to suit the high energy
physics people.

If you are going to use a RHEL clone you are probably better of using
CentOS, but you won't come to any harm using SL.

P.