Re: FC vs CentOS (or equiv)

• Previous message: P Ruetz: "Re: FC vs CentOS (or equiv)"
• In reply to: Ivan Marsh: "Re: FC vs CentOS (or equiv)"
• Next in thread: Ivan Marsh: "Re: FC vs CentOS (or equiv)"
• Reply: Ivan Marsh: "Re: FC vs CentOS (or equiv)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:39:47 -0400

On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:48:55 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:45:44 -0400, Daniel Ganek wrote:
>
>> P Ruetz wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have been trying to put Linux on my new Dell 9100. Redhat 9 did not
>>> work because of the USB only keyboard and mouse (or maybe I could get
>>> it to work if I were clever enough). FC 4 worked with the
>>> keyboard/mouse but not the network card. CentOS 4.1 worked much more
>>> smoothly. Everything seems to work on the first pass without kernel
>>> rebuilding.
>>>
>>> So my question is: Should I even bother with FC in the future or just
>>> stick with one of the Redhat clones (e.g. CentOS)?
>>>
>>> I use Linux occasionally to build my software for Linux and Solaris
>>> (with a cross compiler). It is probably pretty obvious that I am no
>>> Linux expert, but can generally "scrape by" with some help.
>>
>> Stick with CentOS - it's very stable; especially since you're doing real
>> work(tm)
>>
>> FC is RH's bleed edge stuff - Great for experimenting but not for real
>> work.
>
> I'm running FC on several production servers with no issues so I'm don't
> think I can agree with that statement.

I'm using FC3 and FC4 on half a dozen machines without problems. There are
more packages available for Fedora then there are for RHEL systems
(although the FC packages will generally work on the similar RHEL systems)
so Fedora is a better choice for a knowledgeable end user. However Fedora
is always a moving target because it's a development platform. When a new
FC is released it's going to be crap, that's guaranteed. Within a few
weeks it will start to be usable and within three months it will be a joy.
By then end or it's life an FC release is as good as a RHEL release, in
fact that's pretty much what RHEL is, you can think of a late Fedora Core
as a release candidate for the next RHEL. RHEL 4 looks very much like
Fedora Core 3 looked at the time of RHEL 4's release. If you were to
install FC3 right now it will work every bit as well for you as CentOS
4.1 as long as you've done all of the updates. FC4 with all of the current
updates should also work for you. FC4 has reached the pretty good stage at
this point. That said there is nothing wrong with using CentOS. If you
would like to keep the same OS on your box for several years then it's the
right choice for you. RHEL is supported for five years so as long as the
CentOS project doesn't dissolve you'll be able to get patches for your 4.1
system. Fedora releases are supported for a much shorter period.

• Previous message: P Ruetz: "Re: FC vs CentOS (or equiv)"
• In reply to: Ivan Marsh: "Re: FC vs CentOS (or equiv)"
• Next in thread: Ivan Marsh: "Re: FC vs CentOS (or equiv)"
• Reply: Ivan Marsh: "Re: FC vs CentOS (or equiv)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]