How stable is fedora?

Tobias Weisserth tobias at
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 mailing list