Results 1 to 8 of 8
i wanted to install fedora core 1 on a production server with third party software like java,apache,tomcat etc...i was wondering if its stable and if anyone out there has used ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
- 09-21-2004 #1
- Join Date
- May 2003
has anyone tried fedora core 1?
i wanted to install fedora core 1 on a production server with third party software like
java,apache,tomcat etc...i was wondering if its stable and if anyone out there has used it in similar environments??did anyone find any flaws in it or anything? any info is helpful...i'm just trying to gauge if i shud go ahead with it on a production server.
NikFixing Unix is better than working with Windows.
- 09-22-2004 #2
Fedora's great for servers, although more tuned to the desktop. If I were you I'd give debian, slackware, hell even gentoo for servers is better than FC 1, FC1 is chock-full of flaws though, most of them can be solved in #fedora on freenode.net or via google(latter preferred)
- 09-22-2004 #3
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
I would agree with tylerwilie. FC1 is great for desktop, but I don't know that it would be the best for a production server as it is rather buggy. That's just my personal experience, though... I'm sure others will disagree! In fact, I know a dude who uses FC1 exclusivly as a server for his buisness and says he's never had a problem.
Hope that helps.
JeremyRegistered Linux user #346571
"All The Dude ever wanted was his rug back" - The Dude
- 09-22-2004 #4
I've found in my personal experience that Fedora Core 2 is actually much more stable than FC1, even though it uses the newer 2.6 kernel and some updated packages. But then, YMMV.Registered Linux user #270181
TechieMoe's Tech Rants
- 09-25-2004 #5
Yea, fedora core 2 is not as bad as 1, but it still has some problems. Where my sound didn't work in FC1, it worked in FC2, yet , on a friends PC it was the opposite way around. For running webservers there are more viable choices, although FC isn't bad, Gentoo, Slackware, and Debian are great choices.
- 09-26-2004 #6
- Join Date
- May 2004
if you are running a production server, i might suggest getting one of the paid version of Linux.
Of course this depends on the size/affordability of your company, and what kind of server it is.
Where i worked we ran FC 1 on a lot of our test/development servers and ran Red Hat Enterprise on our production servers. Our servers were mostly for Oracle databases, but we did have a webserver as well.
Its just nice to have that "support" on production.
Really though, it depends what kind of server you want to run. There are several "server-specific" distro's out there.
Most any stable distribution will work fine, it just depends how often you want updates, how you want to go about them, and how minimalistic you want to go.
- 09-28-2004 #7
At home, I have FC2 running on all workstations and on my server.
And although it's "only" setup as a file-/printer-/music server, FC2 does the job without any problems!
For a productions enviroment, you might want to consider Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
- 10-01-2004 #8
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
I would have to say RedHat Enterprise because of the constant updates. And if you want to be cheap.. there is a distro based on (basically a clone) RedHat Enterprise Linux 3.. it's called White Box Linux. They have stripped all of RedHat's logos and such out and put a $0 price tag on it. Do a google search for it. You could also try FreeBSD if you are looking for some pretty damn good stability.