Fedora Makes a Terrible Server?

Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
Mon Mar 24 21:05:55 UTC 2008


Mauriat M wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Valent Turkovic
>>  <valent.turkovic at gmail.com> wrote:
>>  > http://www.mjmwired.net/linux/2008/02/11/fedora-makes-a-terrible-server/
>>  >
>>  >  What is your experience ?
>>
>>  The general wisdom from fedora power users is:
>>  - Fedora for the desktop / workstation
>>  - CentOS for the home server or other unsupported server
>>  - RedHat for a serious server or otherwise when support is needed
>>
>>  * by support I mean paid support
>>
>>  Also, SELinux isn't nearly that hard. I wouldn't put a box on the open
>>  internet without SELinux.
>>
> 
> Well I guess I was hoping for the best of both worlds by having my
> desktop "act" as a server.  Why have 2 machines when 1 will do?
> 
> Too much to ask, I know.

You can do that, but you have to choose between stability and new 
features.  Server apps have mostly been feature-complete for years so 
you avoid problems with the older app versions included in Centos.  If 
you are happy with those versions of desktop apps as well (about circa 
FC6 in fedora terms) then you are all set.  If you want newer desktop 
apps, the way development currently works you have to take a new kernel 
and associated unstable changes to get them.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com




More information about the users mailing list