EXT :RE: Fedora Server?

[Burke, Thomas (ES)]

Well...  The upgrade will be from RH 6.2....  So yeah, I'm not real concerned with latest & greatest.

But my uptime has been near 100% over the last 10 years or so...

-----Original Message-----
From: redhat-list-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:redhat-list-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of m.roth at 5-cent.us
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 10:26 AM
To: General Red Hat Linux discussion list
Subject: EXT :RE: Fedora Server?

Marti, Robert wrote:
>> bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Burke, Thomas (ES)
>>
>> I'm seriously considering upgrading my server to Fedora.  All the
>> distros I see, however, tout their "desktopiness."  Are they all good to
>> use as a server, or is there one in particular I should use?  Or
>> something else, for that matter?  I am intrigued by the engineering
>> "spin," and might like to install all that stuff
>> on my server, as well...

> It depends what you mean by "server".  Fedora is fine for a home server or
> your desktop.  The problem with using it for a public facing service is
> that the code develops too quickly, and just running a yum update could
> take you from a 100% working box to something like httpd not starting
> -which would be a bad thing for a webserver.
<snip>
I concur. I would *NEVER* use fedora on a real server - it's bleeding
edge, not leading edge. If uptime is more important than the n33t3st,
c00l3st f38tur3s (esp. when they don't always work), use something that's
behind the times, like RHEL or CentOS.

Hell, not only do we run CentOS at work, I run it at home - I don't want
to come home after a long day dealing with many, many servers and
workstations to have to debug my own system....

         mark


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request at redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list