Fedora on the server

Scott Gose gose at mcs.anl.gov
Fri Nov 14 07:44:03 UTC 2003

On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 07:58:29PM -0800, Nathan G. Grennan wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 17:50, Dave Oxley wrote:
> > My company is buying a new Dell server (2x2.4GHz P4 Xeon, 2Gb RAM, 73Gb 
> > RAID 1 SCSI) for our production customer facing web site and I have been 
> > trying to decide on which Linux distribution to use. It needs to run 
> > Apache, tomcat, sendmail, mysql, php and bind and have minimum downtime. 
> > We normally have about 25Gb of HTTP traffic a month, but is likely to 
> > double over the next 12 months. I am not fussed about having paid for 
> > support (that's my job!)
> > 
> > I was going to choose RH9 (after deciding against Debian), but I just 
> > found out about Fedora. Is Core 1 suitable for this type of environment? 
> > Or would you recommend I go with RH9 or Debian.
> > 
> > Cheers.
> Unlike other replies, I would recommend Fedora Core 1 for servers. I
> recently upgraded 10(4 dns, 1 web, 1 mail, 1 backup, 1 monitoring, 1
> misc, 1 dns/web/mail/backup/monitoring) servers from Red Hat 9 to Fedora
> Core 1. Did I have problems? Of course. Could it be a little better?
> Yes. Did it have bugs similar to those seen with a Red Hat 8.0 to Red
> Hat 9 upgrade? Very much so. Is it stable after you get the details
> worked out? Yes. Are there quite a few important package upgrades? Yes.
> Overall it didn't go as well as I would have liked, but better than I
> expected.

Very well said.  
> My only concern so far is how much of a mess are updates going to
> become. Between security updates currently sitting in testing, potential
> messy forced package upgrades, and less than a guarantee from Red Hat
> that they will make updated packages available for Fedora Core in a
> timely fashion, I am a little worried.

I am in the same boat.  This is one of the reasons why Redhat made the
switch; to put all that branding they've done behind a name you can now
only get by paying for it.

I like Fedora/Redhat and I will continue to push it and use it wherever
I can.  But Fedora has a lot to show in terms of how great (i.e. stable
and reliable) of a "product" it can be.  Through dedicated community
support, I know Fedora can be lifted to the same level and above that
which Redhat Linux sat on.

I know several clusters that are "Redhat" clusters.  I just hope in the
future, they can be "Fedora" clusters. :-)

> My analysis of distributions that leaves me with Fedora Core:
> Debian: stable - too old, testing - some packages too old, unstable -
> rawhide and still some packages too old
> SuSE: Pay for box set, no isos, ftp install a few months after release,
> and hence a No Go.
> Mandrake: Too buggy, seems like complete lack of QA(Sadly RH9 and FC1
> are a little closer to Mandrake than RH7.3 than I would like)
> Gentoo: Shows great promise, install process needs a lot of work,
> compiling Everything from source isn't what it is cracked up to be, and
> still needs a little more security infrastructure.
> Red Hat 9: Pretty good, but now out of date and updates going away soon
> Red Hat Enterprise 3: Too expensive, too restrictive of a license, and
> will in the not too distant future be too out of date.
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Scott Gose
gose at mcs.anl.gov

More information about the fedora-list mailing list