How stable is fedora?
tobias at weisserth.de
Mon May 10 18:30:07 UTC 2004
On Mon, 2004-05-10 at 20:18, McKeever Chris wrote:
> I know this topic has come up before, especially when FEDORA was first introduced, but now after months of implementing, tweaking and
> CORE2, how secure and stable is FEDORA??
I'd say Fedora *should* be as stable as other Red Hat releases. I have
had no downtimes with Fedora yet apart from one older client where the
X-server wouldn't start after an update with up2date.
> Currently, we are running RH7.3 for almost everything from mail to DNS to samba domain control. Can Fedora be implemented in its place
> and provide an environment that can be dependable?
> if the answer is unfortunately NO, what other are the more highly recommended distros
The answer depends. The trouble with Fedora are the short release
cycles. There is a legacy project but no experience exists with that.
You can't implement a mission critical environment without prior
knowledge how long this platform will be supported.
Using Core 1 almost from the beginning, I have to witness it already has
reached an end this month due to its bigger brother, Core 2. But I'd not
be willing to risk a perfectly productive Core 1 environment just
because I have to upgrade to Core 2 to get patches. That's one of the
reasons why most backbone machines I run still use either SuSE or Red
Hat. Replacing a client installation with Core 2 is not the problem
just my thoughts,
More information about the fedora-list