Semi-Noob: RH9 vs. Fedora

CobaltCobalt Connecticut
edited April 2004 in Science & Tech
Any really noticible differences? Some guy and I are going to start a basic LAMP server for our general hosting needs. It isn't an "OMG IT NEEDS EVERY SINGLE UPDATE IN THE WORLD AND NEEDS TO BE UP 120.99% OF THE TIME" type of server.

Would I notice any program [cPanel, Apache, MySQL] differences if I go with Fedora over RedHat 9? Thanks Guys.

Comments

  • Straight_ManStraight_Man Geeky, in my own way Naples, FL Icrontian
    edited April 2004
    RH9 Enterprise Server will have utils that help you set this up RH's way. Fedora might have Webmin, which should facilitate same if present and can be gotten if not.

    Try the cheap way first, you will learn down dirty and grubby way to set up, and that might help you many times later debugging what auto-utils did with verious versions of updates versus util versions that come and tend to be rarely updated until version change time. Think of RH Server as more precanned for setup, but you can get and build most stuff into Fedora with some work. Primary diff will be ease of intgrating it in, can be done with both.

    HINT:

    http://rpmfind.net/ is your FRIEND here.

    Also:
    http://fr.rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/

    These are RPM search engines-- indexed DBs of RPM data that is dynamically tranlated to HTML pages for you-- and RPM info engines, with download links, some of which are local to them (THEY DO mirror RPMs) and some of which point to mfr or pub sites. Deps and provides info is avialable by RPM also. note, they are in France, but they are good. One that is NOT in France is http://speakeasy.rpmfind.net/ but it is HYPER BUSY and I could not even get to it today.

    John D., wishing you luck either way, but saying you will sooner or later end up under the hood, so might as well get your hands greasy now so to speak. ADVICE: String test things on a baby or not so baby LAN, first, as an Intranet setup. THEN stick it on the web.
  • res0r9lmres0r9lm Florida
    edited April 2004
    I couldn't answer for sure exactly what improvement have been made but I have imagine fedora core 2 comes with kernel 2.6.* and is worth the upgrade on it's own. I'm no fan of redhat or fedora but is easy to use.
  • CobaltCobalt Connecticut
    edited April 2004
    Don't worry guys, this isn't going to be a business type of server. It's just kind of a test-web server, and a server for my and the guy's basic stuff, nothing too special. And the cPanel is just to play around/host auxillary domains easily. We're getting an educational licence (it's going to be at our school.)

    I'm going to go with Fedora, thanks guys. :D
  • Straight_ManStraight_Man Geeky, in my own way Naples, FL Icrontian
    edited April 2004
    For that purpose, Fedora is fine. Webmin will come in handy, though.

    John D.
  • TexTex Dallas/Ft. Worth
    edited April 2004
    I vote fedora release 2 with the 2.6 kernel. In the last two days I have installed rh9, both fedora's and Enterprise linux as3 several times each playing around on my dual opteron.

    Tex
  • res0r9lmres0r9lm Florida
    edited April 2004
    Angry at Red Hat?

    Those of you monitoring the Fedora development mailing list had an opportunity to witness sparks flying around after the release of Fedora Core 2 Test2 a week ago. Several testers expressed strongly worded dissatisfaction over the quality of this release, even accusing Red Hat developers of neglect and poor work.

    What's wrong with Fedora Core 2 Test2? Two things. The first CD fails to boot for a surprisingly high number of testers. Some of you might recall a similar problem with Mandrakelinux 10.0 Community, where a simple workaround was to boot from the second CD and replace it with the first one at the start of the installation. A similar workaround exists for this Fedora release, using the boot CD from Fedora Core 2 Test1. The second often reported problem was the integration of SELinux into this release, a major surgery with some unpleasant side-effects and occasional unexpected behaviour. While SELinux can certainly be justified on critical server installations, an average desktop user probably won't need it. If you fall into this category, try adding "selinux=0" to the kernel command line, or use "SELINUX=disabled" in your /etc/sysconfig/selinux to return to the standard kernel.

    The unpleasant exchanges on the Fedora mailing lists last week lead to a simple conclusion: if you are new to Linux or if you are not interested in helping out with debugging, or indeed, if you cannot control your emotions, then stay away from Fedora Core 2 Test2. Like any beta product, it has serious bugs. But the last things the developers need right now is to deal with infuriated users accusing them of poor work.

    http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20040405#1
Sign In or Register to comment.