Well, as much as I have loved Fedora/Redhat linux I have finally moved on. I have used it since about Redhat 5... and Fedora 9 is approximately equal to Redhat 18 if you consider the name change at RH9->FC1. I still have a Fedora desktop, but the server has finally moved to Ubuntu. The sole reason here (other than Ubuntu is pretty slickly packaged) is the maintenance schedules. Fedora gives you 6 months... and my "shove every conceivable app on one server" is a royal pain to keep up to date if you have to re-roll it every 6 months. It generally takes 2-3 days to even get the thing sort of right.
Ubuntu server promises a 5 year maintenance... which really makes it a good candidate for commercial use. Are you listening Fedora? I was on board when fedora legacy continued maintenance. But the sirens are calling me.
I am also amazed at just how different the 2 flavors are. Everything is chopped up differently and packaged just a little bit differently.
2 comments:
I have been using Ubuntu as a desktop for a few years (6 months after the first one was released)...it has allowed me to learn what little I know about *nix.
One of "the Swedes" I worked with at Aych Pee installed Ubuntu on a Sparc 5 (not sure which model but it was an old low end pizza box) that we played with as a wiki server and it ran pretty well.
Apt-get makes updating easy!
My experience with Linux/Sun is about 5 years old, so I am not up to speed.
...but at the time I both experimented with running linux on sparc and sunos on intel. Neither one worked particularly well. Things may be better now.
I am still getting used to apt and dpkg -- I am totally used to yum/rpm. Apt seems to be pretty solid and maybe a little more advanced than yum -- but since I have only barely played with it, I am probably not qualified to make that call.
My bad experiences with yum came in when it switched versions and really screwed things up.... which may be more a comment on the packaging than on the tool. We shall see how apt deals with this sort of thing.
Post a Comment