> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 08:35:29 -0600 > From: Justin Crabtree <crabtrej@xxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Fedora on servers > To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <41C98631.3030202@xxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Nick Miller wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I am new to the list so I apologize if this has been asked > before. I > > was wondering if anyone here has been using fedora in a production > > server environment, specifically web and mail services. I > know it is > > bleeding edge but it seems really stable in my experience. > > > > Best Regards, > > Nick > > > > Most of the non-application servers we have built recently have been > Fedora. Most of the application servers' OSs are determined > by what the > vendor supports. Our LDAP and mail servers are all FC2 or > FC3 as well > as a DNS and NTP server and several test servers. The main > reason for > this is the version of Cyrus and Openldap on FC vs RHEL3. We > have had > no stability issues at all. As others have said, the main > issue is the > short lifecycle of Fedora releases. > > -- > Justin Crabtree > Java Programmer > Ozarks Technical Community College > 447-7533 Same experience for me. FC2 is pretty stable, as long as you can pick a kernel that works with your server platform. 2.6.5 will install on HP Proliant but no kernel after that will, like FC3, apparently. It's somehow tied to the SmartArray controller. You need to pick carefully which updates you'll take as they can contain serious regressions and getting a fix may force you to take an upstream release. Again, as Justin mentioned, lifecycle means releases don't stick around. I'm using the 2.6.8 kernel because it works well for most things (HP the obvious exception). Save your RPMs, Red Hat will pull some of them over time -- like the 2.6.8 kernels. Study your updates before applying to busy servers.
