On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 07:58:29PM -0800, Nathan G. Grennan wrote: > On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 17:50, Dave Oxley wrote: > > My company is buying a new Dell server (2x2.4GHz P4 Xeon, 2Gb RAM, 73Gb > > RAID 1 SCSI) for our production customer facing web site and I have been > > trying to decide on which Linux distribution to use. It needs to run > > Apache, tomcat, sendmail, mysql, php and bind and have minimum downtime. > > We normally have about 25Gb of HTTP traffic a month, but is likely to > > double over the next 12 months. I am not fussed about having paid for > > support (that's my job!) > > > > I was going to choose RH9 (after deciding against Debian), but I just > > found out about Fedora. Is Core 1 suitable for this type of environment? > > Or would you recommend I go with RH9 or Debian. > > > > Cheers. > > Unlike other replies, I would recommend Fedora Core 1 for servers. I > recently upgraded 10(4 dns, 1 web, 1 mail, 1 backup, 1 monitoring, 1 > misc, 1 dns/web/mail/backup/monitoring) servers from Red Hat 9 to Fedora > Core 1. Did I have problems? Of course. Could it be a little better? > Yes. Did it have bugs similar to those seen with a Red Hat 8.0 to Red > Hat 9 upgrade? Very much so. Is it stable after you get the details > worked out? Yes. Are there quite a few important package upgrades? Yes. > Overall it didn't go as well as I would have liked, but better than I > expected. Very well said. > My only concern so far is how much of a mess are updates going to > become. Between security updates currently sitting in testing, potential > messy forced package upgrades, and less than a guarantee from Red Hat > that they will make updated packages available for Fedora Core in a > timely fashion, I am a little worried. I am in the same boat. This is one of the reasons why Redhat made the switch; to put all that branding they've done behind a name you can now only get by paying for it. I like Fedora/Redhat and I will continue to push it and use it wherever I can. But Fedora has a lot to show in terms of how great (i.e. stable and reliable) of a "product" it can be. Through dedicated community support, I know Fedora can be lifted to the same level and above that which Redhat Linux sat on. I know several clusters that are "Redhat" clusters. I just hope in the future, they can be "Fedora" clusters. :-) > My analysis of distributions that leaves me with Fedora Core: > > Debian: stable - too old, testing - some packages too old, unstable - > rawhide and still some packages too old > > SuSE: Pay for box set, no isos, ftp install a few months after release, > and hence a No Go. > > Mandrake: Too buggy, seems like complete lack of QA(Sadly RH9 and FC1 > are a little closer to Mandrake than RH7.3 than I would like) > > Gentoo: Shows great promise, install process needs a lot of work, > compiling Everything from source isn't what it is cracked up to be, and > still needs a little more security infrastructure. > > Red Hat 9: Pretty good, but now out of date and updates going away soon > > Red Hat Enterprise 3: Too expensive, too restrictive of a license, and > will in the not too distant future be too out of date. > > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list -- Scott Gose gose@xxxxxxxxxxx
