EXT :RE: Fedora Server?

m.roth at 5-cent.us m.roth at 5-cent.us
Tue Jun 28 15:22:09 UTC 2011


Marti, Robert wrote:
>> bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of m.roth at 5-cent.us
>> Burke, Thomas (ES) wrote:
>> > [mailto:redhat-list-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of m.roth at 5-cent.us
>> > Marti, Robert wrote:
>> >>> bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Burke, Thomas (ES)
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm seriously considering upgrading my server to Fedora.  All the
>> <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.
>> >
>> > 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...
>>
>> So, why are you even considering it... wait, are do you mean RH 6.2 (10
>> years old), or RHEL, in which case, I didn't think 6.2 was out, only 6.1?
>
> He's likely being honest and saying it's a 10 year old box.  That's a bad
> thing.  Get it on *anything* current... and if it's been on the internet
> for 10 years, you should make sure it's actually still yours.

Why? Until Aug of '09, I had a firewall/router box, running RH 9 (Shrike).
Now, admittedly, it *was* a firewall/router, and I'd run Bastille Linux on
it (which is a set of hardening scripts, not a distro), and to the best of
my knowledge, having started that on 5.2? 6? all with Bastille, I never
had an intrusion, and had been on broadband for about 10 years.

        mark




More information about the redhat-list mailing list