[arch-general] Arch Linux security is still poor....

[Nilesh Govindarajan]

On 03/16/2010 06:53 PM, Chris Allison wrote:
> I would have thought that this only makes sense in the context of a
> "point-in-time release". i.e. you have a server which isn't updated as
> regularly as your desktop.  The onus then is on the user to ensure
> that the versions of packages they are using are "safe".
>
> I don't see this as a problem with the rolling release system that Arch uses.
>
> Where it does make sense is if a publicly available, LTS type "server"
> repository is used.  Then it would be up to the maintainer of the repo
> to keep on top of security fixes.
>
> regards
>
> Chris
>
>
>

Actually speaking, Arch is ideal for a server. With proper customization 
abilities and up-to-date software, your server is less likely to get 
compromised (unless improperly configured) in contrary to those of 
CentOS, RHEL < (yeah it is less than) Fedora, Ubuntu, etc. which keep 
very old packages.

-- 
Nilesh Govindarajan
Site & Server Adminstrator
www.itech7.com