[ale] Clarification - Fedora as a server?

[James P. Kinney III]

On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 14:52, J.M. Taylor wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 2004, Robert Heaven wrote:
> 
> > There are several of us on here with extensive FreeBSD experience.
> Well then I'll just bug ya'll. ;)
> 
> > 
> > Just a clarification question: If the host is being provided by (and the
> > OS choice is dictated by) a hosting company, will they not be the ones
> > that set everything up and maintain it? Once you give them your basic
> > requirements (apache, mysql, etc.) they have to either say "yes we can"
> > or "no we can't".
> 
> Well, not quite. They don't manage the box at all, in fact, they don't
> have root on it.  It's a leased, dedicated box.  They do set up the OS
> initially (and very securely, I might add) but after that, they don't
> touch it.  But I'd rather not a) deal with remotely putting a different
> distro on a machine I don't have physical access to, and b) be in the
> position of saying "hey guys, could you look at x" and them saying "ah
> well, we'd love to but we don't know jack about that distro".  I'm sure
> they'd be very helpful but...well, that's a lot of effort for something
> that is, in effect, an indulgence for myself and some family and friends.
> So if I can move to a supported OS with minimal pain, that's what I'll do.
> 
> > 
> > Also, Fedora Core 1 is not stable. In fact, Fedora, by it's nature, is
> > bleeding edge and unstable.
> This is what I was afraid of.  Indulgance or not, I want my machine up and 
> stable. 

The core systems of Fedora _are_ stable. The flaky stuff is the UI
fluff. Latest, greatest gnome-libs doesn't matter in a server
environment.

Server environment issues in Fedora are versions of apache, bind,
sendmail/qmail, glibc, gcc, perl, etc.

Upgrades to the latest, greatest bind and sendmail are a must. Headaches
happen in apache. Fedora does use Apache 2.x. That version has show
itself to be quite stable but not all of the bodules are up to
supporting v. 2.x yet. Check the Apache site for the up-to-date details.

Another potential "gotcha" is the perl 6.8, just like RH 9, is the
multi-threaded perl. I run Interchange and it is very unhappy with
multi-threaded perl. So I have a perl version compiled from the src.rpm
that has the threading turned off.


Comparing the two Linux distros available, I would still go with Fedora.
I have RH3 Enterprise and Workstation for i386 and x86_64. It is stable
but there is a "no upgrade" feel to them as the patches RedHat applied
make "rolling my own" of any upgrade app _really_ complicated.

or all the input
> jenn
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> 
> !DSPAM:40ae4cbb26981901720491!
-- 
James P. Kinney III          \Changing the mobile computing world/
CEO & Director of Engineering \          one Linux user         /
Local Net Solutions,LLC        \           at a time.          /
770-493-8244                    \.___________________________./
http://www.localnetsolutions.com

GPG ID: 829C6CA7 James P. Kinney III (M.S. Physics)
<jkinney at localnetsolutions.com>
Fingerprint = 3C9E 6366 54FC A3FE BA4D 0659 6190 ADC3 829C 6CA7
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part