Re: OS recommendations/Aging software issues
From: fredex (fredex_at_fcshome.stoneham.ma.us)
Date: 06/02/05
- Previous message: Tim Waugh: "Re: CUPS not 'resetting' as I'd expect"
- In reply to: Marc M: "OS recommendations/Aging software issues"
- Next in thread: Neal Rhodes: "Re: OS recommendations/Aging software issues"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 11:54:47 -0400 To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 09:34:53AM -0400, Marc M wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I work for a major defense contractor that is very tight with money at
> times. Two years ago, before I came, they got RH 9 (bought or downloaded-
> whatever). I guess that got deemed appropriate to buy at the time, and it
> has been sitting here getting old ever since. The purpose of this server is
> to run Symantec Manhunt on it as an IDS. They bought Manhunt at the same
> time and never got around to deploying it until now.
>
> Now I am about to deploy a linux server (Dell) and I am trying to figure out
> which version to go with - RH 9, FC 1-3, or whatever. I want it to be
> redhat-based since I am the main admin, and I am more comfortable with that
> than on debian based systems.
>
> On the other hand I am not sure what to do. My boss makes the argument that
> we need to run the oldest, since he has seen versioning issues and conflicts
> in this situation. However most of that is in the world of Windows which
> does stupid things by default as we all know.
>
> In this scenario my argument is <still> that we should go with something
> more recent. I don't like the idea of putting something out there that is so
> old it isimpractical by today's standards, that am going to think is stupid.
> I guess there is some wisdom in being able to keep the age of the OS in sync
> with the age of the software, but in the linux realm, that really isn't the
> same issue as it is in other areas - right? OTOH I don't want to do a 'yum
> update' on the box and not be able to get updates because the version is so
> <frickin'> old. I think FC2 would be a good choice. Although it is still
> old, it at least is a little bit ahead of RH9. An additional concern - even
> if I were to deploy FC2, I would probably want to upgrade that too. Is that
> gonna be a problem? Can I upgrade versions of Fedora (2 to 3 to whatever) on
> a production box without a lot of problems? Will yum do that cleanly and
> consistently without a lot of headaches?
>
> Whatever choice I make is going to have to last for a good while. Does
> anyone have any advice for this situation?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Marc
You've already received a lot of advice, most of it good.
One important thing has not been pointed out by the other posters, though
one of them alluded to it. That important fact is: RED HAT IS NO LONGER
SUPPORTING RH9. As was pointed out elsewhere, others are still providing
security patches for it. However, this sounds like a "mission-critical"
function, do you want to entrust it to an obsolete/unsupported version
of the OS? I wouldn't!
As others suggested, you should find out what distributions/versions of
Linux are required for the app you want to run, and choose one from that
list that is most likely to receive ongoing support from its vendor.
Keep a spare machine (preferably identical to the production one) up to
date with all vendor-released patches/updates, and once you've proven that
each batch of updates causes no trouble, apply them to the production box.
Fred
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list@redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anything offered to me as
the result of an unsolicited e-mail message. Nor will I forward chain
letters, petitions, mass mailings, or virus warnings to large numbers
of others. This is my contribution to the survival of the online
community.
--Roger Ebert, December, 1996
----------------------------- The Boulder Pledge -----------------------------
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Previous message: Tim Waugh: "Re: CUPS not 'resetting' as I'd expect"
- In reply to: Marc M: "OS recommendations/Aging software issues"
- Next in thread: Neal Rhodes: "Re: OS recommendations/Aging software issues"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
