Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on July 15, 2005 06:12 AM
I think I didn't quite wrote what I was really thinking. Most of the production servers I run actually *are* FCs (mostly 1, 2 and 3).
I said that I wouldn't recommend Fedora Core for production enviroments, because sometimes you have to deal with some of the newer stuff (like SELinux) without much documentation.
I also had my share of troubles compiling software that isn't quite gcc4 ready yet. An easy example? Mplayer. Obviously this isn't Fedora's fault, but other distros don't run into these kind of problems sticking to the good old gcc3 (or 2.95). Good thing that FC4 also comes with gcc3.2.
Upgrading between FCs can be a real pain. Usually I just backup the configuration and user's files and install from scratch. Every time I tried the yum way I ended up with a more or less screwed up system.
If I'm the one that's going to be managing the server, I use Fedora, no doubt about it. But when it's a server for someone else I always recommend Debian. It's a rock solid distro.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Oh no...not again.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2005 06:12 AMI said that I wouldn't recommend Fedora Core for production enviroments, because sometimes you have to deal with some of the newer stuff (like SELinux) without much documentation.
I also had my share of troubles compiling software that isn't quite gcc4 ready yet. An easy example? Mplayer. Obviously this isn't Fedora's fault, but other distros don't run into these kind of problems sticking to the good old gcc3 (or 2.95). Good thing that FC4 also comes with gcc3.2.
Upgrading between FCs can be a real pain. Usually I just backup the configuration and user's files and install from scratch. Every time I tried the yum way I ended up with a more or less screwed up system.
If I'm the one that's going to be managing the server, I use Fedora, no doubt about it. But when it's a server for someone else I always recommend Debian. It's a rock solid distro.
#