Fedora Makes a Terrible Server?

[Uno Engborg]

Actually, CentOS 5.1 isn't that bad as a desktop. So you could probably get
away
with using just one machine. The Linux desctop have come a long way, and you
no
longer need to be on the bleeding edge to have a resonable set of
functionality.


2008/3/24, Mauriat M <mirandam at gmail.com>:
>
> 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.
>
> -Mauriat
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20080325/460d1459/attachment-0001.html