| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
An update on Fedora's "issues"An update on Fedora's "issues"Posted Aug 17, 2008 22:12 UTC (Sun) by BeS (subscriber, #43108)In reply to: An update on Fedora's "issues" by sbergman27 Parent article: An update on Fedora's "issues"
>I've had too many systems bitten by Fedora's playing fast and loose with updates That's probably the downside of having a bleeding-edge distribution. Personally i enjoy this character of Fedora on my personal desktop systems. Sure from time to time a update can break something but in my experience this is really seldom and happen to my more often with Debian testing (which i used before) But... >In the mean time, I continue my planned migrations of existing Fedora servers ... imho you should never use Fedora for a server because both the bleeding-edge characteristic and the short support cycle is not really suitable for a server. For a server i would always choose CentOS or RedHat if i want something like "Fedora for the server" or Debian if it could/should be something complete different than Fedora.
(Log in to post comments)
An update on Fedora's "issues" Posted Aug 18, 2008 13:22 UTC (Mon) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] In the end, it is better to stay with one line of distributuions for desktop + server, be it Debian(ish) or Fedora + CentOS/RHEL. The trouble you get into because you don't remember how to handle some configuration in one or the other, or subtle inconsistencies due to different software strains, just isn't worth it.
|
|
||||||||||||