On 10/12/2007, <b class="gmail_sendername">Arthur Clune</b> <<a href="mailto:arthur@clune.org">arthur@clune.org</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>I'd blame the users. Fedora isn't suitable for running on a server.<br>Blaming it for that is like blaming water for being wet. Fedora<br>explicitly says it's a cutting edge distro with no long term support.
<br><br>CentOS is a perfectly fine server distro for those that like a<br>redhat derived one (for those that don't know it's RedHat<br>Advanced Server minus the RH branding). Debian/Ubuntu<br>are also fine products.
<br><br></blockquote></div><br>Fedora can be run perfectly well as a server provided it is kept up to date on security issues.<br>Once it is running, and properly configured it will just sit there are work provided you don't let do its own updates and even with the latest version once it is properly set up it will work fine - in the weeks soon after a new release then some tinkering is almost always needed.
<br>Of course you can run version latest-1 (=n) and update it periodically and then only install the next one when n+2 is on the verge of release, by which time version n+1 is usually pretty stable.<br><br>I guess much depends on how familiar the person administering it is the the details of cutting edge development.
<br>