Migration options

[Bill Fung]

Thanks Rodolfo,

I have read the page, but somewhat don't know the exact fee of site 
licence...
site licence = base package + fixed option OR base package + unlimited 
option
If that is the case, then site licence would be more expensive than 
individual subscription ($50 for AS, $25 for WS) which is unreasonable.

Since our university is under severe budget cut, the price may be 
unacceptable under our current situation. Btw, I have used RedHat linux 
for 6 years. Anyway, Thanks for your kind suggestion.

Bill
HKUST

Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:

> At 02:01 12/29/2003, you wrote:
>
>> I am working in a university and I am maintaining several servers 
>> installed with RedHat 6.2, 7.2, 9. Since RedHat will not give support 
>> at all these version soon, I am considering whether to go for fedora 
>> or rhel 3 or other linux distribution (eg. debian).
>
>
> I'm afraid I cannot help you answer your specific questions very well 
> yet, as I have not had the chance to play with Fedora much yet myself. 
> However, I can emphatically recommend this: SWITCH TO RHEL 3.
>
> Since you are a university, you can qualify for Red Hat's academic 
> pricing. Get the details here:
>
> http://www.redhat.com/solutions/industries/education/
>
> The basics are that you get RHEL-AS for $50/year per server and 
> RHEL-WS for $25/year per desktop. If you have more than 40 or 50 
> machines, you can get a site subscription which will allow you lots 
> and lots of AS and WS licenses for a flat fee which IIRC is around 
> $2,500 annually. This academic pricing makes RHEL3 unbeatable in my view.
>
> Brief comments on your Fedora questions:
>
>> 1) Could I put it into simple words, Fedora is just like RedHat 6.2, 
>> 7.... 9, except it doesn't have any further rpm patch update from 
>> redhat? And rhel 3 is a continuation of rhel 2.
>
>
> Fedora is what you would have expected to see as Red Hat Linux 10. 
> Patches can be obtained via up2date, yum, or apt (all three are 
> supported), and the patches are provided by "the community". Of course 
> this community still includes a bunch of people who work at Red Hat, 
> but Red Hat, Inc. does not officially provide support for Fedora. 
> RHEL3 is close to Red Hat Linux 9, I think.
>
>> 4) I am also serious considering migration the RedHat servers to 
>> other linux distribution such as debian. But I think the migration 
>> would be difficult. Any suggestion or comment?
>
>
> Depends on how much you know about Linux in general, and how much time 
> you have spent learning Red Hat specifically. Switching will take some 
> time and effort and learning; figure out how much you think that will 
> be, compare to the specific benefits you expect to get from switching, 
> and do the math.
>
>> 5) a stupid question, is Fedora as stable as RedHat 9? I think so.
>
>
> Yes, I think so. But at this point my information is mostly 
> second-hand, from reading most of the thousands of posts made to 
> fedora-list since the launch. My own experience with Fedora, as 
> mentioned above, is limited but has been very good. I would not expect 
> you to have problems with apache, innd, and perl, or any other 
> strongly-mainstream products like those.
>
>