[ale] Clarification - Fedora as a server?

[Stuffed Crust]

On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 02:52:12PM -0400, J.M. Taylor wrote:
> > 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. 

If you want your machine up and stable, then don't mess with it once 
you ahve it set up the way you want.  

Fedora Core 1 is not "unstable" in the literal or Debian sense of the
word.  It is a tested, QA'ed release.  "Unstable" Fedora Core is the 
aptly-named RawHide stuff.

Ultimately the distro matters little in that regard; generally speaking
any known bugs will have been fixed when it ships.  What breaks running,
stable systems is users or administrators messing with it -- by 
making changes in configuration and/or installed software.  

But a system isn't going to "break" when it's just sitting there.  
Changes are what introduces instability.

I have four FC1, one RH 9, and four RH 7.3 boxes in production now, and
every one of 'em is as stable and reliable as their underlying hardware. 

I plan on transitioning two of the RH 7.3 boxes to FC2 soon; they're 
both secondary/test machines and through that I'll learn the kinks 
involved before I move the really important RH 7.3 box over.  The last 
RH7.3 box I'll be keeping as a legacy support testbed.

 - Solomon
-- 
Solomon Peachy        				 ICQ: 1318344
Melbourne, FL 					 JID: pitha at myjabber.net
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available