Fedora vs RedHat

[Bill Davidsen]

kevin kempter wrote:
> 
> On Oct 30, 2008, at 1:05 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
> 
>> kevin kempter wrote:
>>> Hi All;
>>> What's the real differences between Fedora and say RHEL Desktop ?
>>> Specifically I'm considering buying one of the following for my new 
>>> dual core laptop w 12G of memory:
>>> Workstation with Standard Subscription
>>> or
>>> Workstation and Multi-OS with Basic Subscription
>>
>> Fedora is the "beta test, bleeding edge" test version.  If it works
>> well and is stable in Fedora, it eventually becomes RHEL.  For example,
>> RHEL5.x is based on Fedora 6.  New Fedora versions come out just about
>> every 6 months or so.
>>
>> I suspect that RHEL6.x will be based on Fedora 10 or 11, once all the
>> KDE/Gnome/kernel things calm down and stabilize.
>>
>> If you want stability, then go with RHEL or CentOS (built from RHEL
>> sources, but rebadged).  If you can stand to lose blood and get
>> frustrated at times, then you can go with Fedora.  Just remember that
>> there are no guarantees that your stuff will work in Fedora...it's a
>> test case.
> 
> Sounds Like RH workstation is for me. A few more questions.
> 
> 1) What's the upgrade path between RH versions (i.e. can I 'Upgrade' 
> from RH5 to RH6 or do I need to do a fresh install) ?

Upgrades are not a supported method is about the best I can describe it. If I 
had machines justifying RHEL, I would NOT upgrade, a clean install is the way to 
avoid having left something behind which will bite you. Upgrades of Fedora have 
been reported here with mixed results and some reported problems of unintended 
carryover.

> 2) Can I add server components to a RH workstation install without 
> restriction ?
> 
You are entitled to anything in the channel.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot