Which distro for the enterprise now?

Quoting Thomas Cameron <thomas.cameron@camerontech.com>:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig White" <craigwhite@azapple.com>
> To: <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 8:22 PM
> Subject: Re: Which distro for the enterprise now?
>
>
> > On Mon, 2004-02-02 at 15:08, Thomas Cameron wrote:
> >
> > > If you don't want the support from RH but want the next version of Red
> Hat
> > > Linux, get Fedora. If you want support, get RHEL.
> > >
> > ---
> > since you keep mentioning this, I will have to give you my preliminary
> > conclusions about Fedora.
> >
> > Great on my desktop - not likely to recommend using it on any client
> > server. Viability is the problem.
> >
> > Short EOL (yes, I understand fedora legacy)
> > High amounts of experimental packaging
>
> I would probably disagree with that - the Core builds are very solid. It's
> very similar to Debian's stable, testing and unstable versions. If you use
> FC1 (for instance), you will get a pretty darned stable build.
>
> > The purpose of fedora is to keep it on the cutting edge and that's not
> > my vision for servers. apt-get dist-upgrade is a wonderful thing - until
> > we are discussing a server. I can get more stability from Debian (I
> > think).
>
> I'd want to do a real world side by side instead of relying on anecdotal
> reports. I can only talk about my experience. In my case, I have not run
> across any show-stoppers with FC1.
>
> Thomas

I was using FC1 and to me its nowhere near as stable as my RHEL box.. The main
reason i say is the software is newer. The fedora has "stable" new software but
i think its not near as stable as some of the revisions that RHEL makes. I have
used fedora and apps seem to not wanna die when i kill an app... I use it for a
workstation though and i am happy.
my 2cents




----------------------------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through Toaster-Horde (http://qmailtoaster.clikka.com/)