On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 09:34:53AM -0400, Marc M wrote: > Hi, > > I work for a major defense contractor that is very tight with money at > times. Two years ago, before I came, they got RH 9 (bought or downloaded- > whatever). I guess that got deemed appropriate to buy at the time, and it > has been sitting here getting old ever since. The purpose of this server is > to run Symantec Manhunt on it as an IDS. They bought Manhunt at the same > time and never got around to deploying it until now. > > Now I am about to deploy a linux server (Dell) and I am trying to figure out > which version to go with - RH 9, FC 1-3, or whatever. I want it to be > redhat-based since I am the main admin, and I am more comfortable with that > than on debian based systems. > > On the other hand I am not sure what to do. My boss makes the argument that > we need to run the oldest, since he has seen versioning issues and conflicts > in this situation. However most of that is in the world of Windows which > does stupid things by default as we all know. > > In this scenario my argument is <still> that we should go with something > more recent. I don't like the idea of putting something out there that is so > old it isimpractical by today's standards, that am going to think is stupid. > I guess there is some wisdom in being able to keep the age of the OS in sync > with the age of the software, but in the linux realm, that really isn't the > same issue as it is in other areas - right? OTOH I don't want to do a 'yum > update' on the box and not be able to get updates because the version is so > <frickin'> old. I think FC2 would be a good choice. Although it is still > old, it at least is a little bit ahead of RH9. An additional concern - even > if I were to deploy FC2, I would probably want to upgrade that too. Is that > gonna be a problem? Can I upgrade versions of Fedora (2 to 3 to whatever) on > a production box without a lot of problems? Will yum do that cleanly and > consistently without a lot of headaches? > > Whatever choice I make is going to have to last for a good while. Does > anyone have any advice for this situation? > > Thanks in advance > > Marc You've already received a lot of advice, most of it good. One important thing has not been pointed out by the other posters, though one of them alluded to it. That important fact is: RED HAT IS NO LONGER SUPPORTING RH9. As was pointed out elsewhere, others are still providing security patches for it. However, this sounds like a "mission-critical" function, do you want to entrust it to an obsolete/unsupported version of the OS? I wouldn't! As others suggested, you should find out what distributions/versions of Linux are required for the app you want to run, and choose one from that list that is most likely to receive ongoing support from its vendor. Keep a spare machine (preferably identical to the production one) up to date with all vendor-released patches/updates, and once you've proven that each batch of updates causes no trouble, apply them to the production box. Fred > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anything offered to me as the result of an unsolicited e-mail message. Nor will I forward chain letters, petitions, mass mailings, or virus warnings to large numbers of others. This is my contribution to the survival of the online community. --Roger Ebert, December, 1996 ----------------------------- The Boulder Pledge -----------------------------
Attachment:
pgpSBZZVkLk6O.pgp
Description: PGP signature
