Opinions on Fedora?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Dany P. Wu, Apr 22, 2005.

  1. Dany P. Wu

    Dany P. Wu Guest

    Hi everyone,

    It's that time again for me. Time to replace the dead server at home!

    I'm tossing up as to what I would like to use. I have Win 2000 and 2003
    Server available but somehow they're not quite right. I deal with Microsoft
    everyday at work and don't really want to come home to any more if I can
    help it.

    I've laid my hands on Debian, Redhat and Slackware distros. Recently I have
    just discovered Fedora. Can anyone give me their opinions on this distro? I
    would like a standard console-based server, i.e. web, mail, ftp, and maybe
    Samba filesharing as well. Is this distro suitable? Can I get some kind of
    web-based remote admin for it?

    Any comments/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

    Cheers,
    Dany.
    Dany P. Wu, Apr 22, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dany P. Wu

    shannon Guest

    Dany P. Wu wrote:

    > Hi everyone,
    >
    > It's that time again for me. Time to replace the dead server at home!
    >
    > I'm tossing up as to what I would like to use. I have Win 2000 and 2003
    > Server available but somehow they're not quite right. I deal with Microsoft
    > everyday at work and don't really want to come home to any more if I can
    > help it.
    >
    > I've laid my hands on Debian, Redhat and Slackware distros. Recently I have
    > just discovered Fedora. Can anyone give me their opinions on this distro? I
    > would like a standard console-based server, i.e. web, mail, ftp, and maybe
    > Samba filesharing as well. Is this distro suitable? Can I get some kind of
    > web-based remote admin for it?
    >
    > Any comments/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Dany.
    >
    >


    Check out http://contribs.org/
    or use Debian with webmin
    shannon, Apr 23, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dany P. Wu

    Gordon Guest

    On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 21:20:41 +1200, Dany P. Wu wrote:

    > Hi everyone,
    >
    > It's that time again for me. Time to replace the dead server at home!
    >
    > I'm tossing up as to what I would like to use. I have Win 2000 and 2003
    > Server available but somehow they're not quite right. I deal with Microsoft
    > everyday at work and don't really want to come home to any more if I can
    > help it.
    >
    > I've laid my hands on Debian, Redhat and Slackware distros. Recently I have
    > just discovered Fedora. Can anyone give me their opinions on this distro? I
    > would like a standard console-based server, i.e. web, mail, ftp, and maybe
    > Samba filesharing as well. Is this distro suitable? Can I get some kind of
    > web-based remote admin for it?
    >
    > Any comments/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.


    Fedora is the cutting edge for Red Hat.

    Ms Penguin has just spotted your posting. Her response was who cares what
    colour it is, for it will take you there.

    Linux loves to Network, mail, web, php, ftp, Samba and etc.

    "standard console-based server" MS Penguin better not see this, think she
    missed it on the first reading. WTF would one want a GUI server? ;-)

    Goo on you for trying something different. Welcome to something which is
    different, but not unusual.
    Gordon, Apr 23, 2005
    #3
  4. Dany P. Wu wrote:
    > Hi everyone,
    >
    > It's that time again for me. Time to replace the dead server at home!
    >
    > I'm tossing up as to what I would like to use. I have Win 2000 and 2003
    > Server available but somehow they're not quite right. I deal with Microsoft
    > everyday at work and don't really want to come home to any more if I can
    > help it.
    >
    > I've laid my hands on Debian, Redhat and Slackware distros. Recently I have
    > just discovered Fedora. Can anyone give me their opinions on this distro? I
    > would like a standard console-based server, i.e. web, mail, ftp, and maybe
    > Samba filesharing as well. Is this distro suitable? Can I get some kind of
    > web-based remote admin for it?
    >
    > Any comments/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Dany.
    >
    >

    Debian
    Graeme Woollett, Apr 23, 2005
    #4
  5. Dany P. Wu

    Shane Guest

    On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 21:20:41 +1200, Dany P. Wu wrote:

    > Hi everyone,
    >
    > It's that time again for me. Time to replace the dead server at home!
    >
    > I'm tossing up as to what I would like to use. I have Win 2000 and 2003
    > Server available but somehow they're not quite right. I deal with Microsoft
    > everyday at work and don't really want to come home to any more if I can
    > help it.
    >
    > I've laid my hands on Debian, Redhat and Slackware distros. Recently I have
    > just discovered Fedora. Can anyone give me their opinions on this distro? I
    > would like a standard console-based server, i.e. web, mail, ftp, and maybe
    > Samba filesharing as well. Is this distro suitable? Can I get some kind of
    > web-based remote admin for it?
    >
    > Any comments/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Dany.


    not knowing your skillset makes it harder to choose,
    but whats stopping you giving them all a go and seeing for yourself which
    best suits your needs?
    all the distros are capable, all have their ups and downs, redhat (presume
    you mean 9.0) is getting long in the tooth, slackware is my personal
    favourite, and Debian has an _excellent_ reputation, although it puts
    stability over functionality(?) (i mean new toys)
    having said that there are ways and means
    HTH
    --

    Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked
    Shane, Apr 23, 2005
    #5
  6. Dany P. Wu

    Dany P. Wu Guest

    "Shane" <-a-geek.net> wrote in message
    news:p-a-geek.net...

    > not knowing your skillset makes it harder to choose,
    > but whats stopping you giving them all a go and seeing for yourself which
    > best suits your needs?
    > all the distros are capable, all have their ups and downs, redhat (presume
    > you mean 9.0) is getting long in the tooth, slackware is my personal
    > favourite, and Debian has an _excellent_ reputation, although it puts
    > stability over functionality(?) (i mean new toys)
    > having said that there are ways and means
    > HTH


    Thanks for all the replies guys.

    I guess I should've mentioned that I've played with various distros of
    Linux, on and off (mostly off), since kernel version 1.1.13 or so - early
    '94 (or 5?). Back then I was tying up the machine for a day or so
    recompiling kernels and other applications to suite my needs.

    It's just in the recent times I have only briefly played with RH 9.0 and
    Debian. As you already said the former is getting a bit old, and I didn't
    quite like the latter - just a personal opinion. I've looked around and
    discovered two rather promising looking distros: Fedora and CentOS. I've
    downloaded both of them and will give them a try when my new file server
    arrives next Tuesday.

    I'm still discovering the intricacies of Linux distro lincensing. It seems
    that RH has commercial subscription for updates or some such? It would be
    nice if users can get free notification of updates. I'm quite happy not to
    have the updates provided, ala RPM, Deb, etc. It's just as easy to go to the
    source of the update and recompile patches, etc. into the necessary bits. As
    long as I know that certain things need to be patched. Is there such a thing
    out there?

    D.
    Dany P. Wu, Apr 23, 2005
    #6
  7. Dany P. Wu

    shannon Guest

    On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 10:58:33 +1200, Dany P. Wu wrote:

    > "Shane" <-a-geek.net> wrote in message
    > news:p-a-geek.net...
    >
    >> not knowing your skillset makes it harder to choose,
    >> but whats stopping you giving them all a go and seeing for yourself which
    >> best suits your needs?
    >> all the distros are capable, all have their ups and downs, redhat (presume
    >> you mean 9.0) is getting long in the tooth, slackware is my personal
    >> favourite, and Debian has an _excellent_ reputation, although it puts
    >> stability over functionality(?) (i mean new toys)
    >> having said that there are ways and means
    >> HTH

    >
    > Thanks for all the replies guys.
    >
    > I guess I should've mentioned that I've played with various distros of
    > Linux, on and off (mostly off), since kernel version 1.1.13 or so - early
    > '94 (or 5?). Back then I was tying up the machine for a day or so
    > recompiling kernels and other applications to suite my needs.
    >
    > It's just in the recent times I have only briefly played with RH 9.0 and
    > Debian. As you already said the former is getting a bit old, and I didn't
    > quite like the latter - just a personal opinion. I've looked around and
    > discovered two rather promising looking distros: Fedora and CentOS. I've
    > downloaded both of them and will give them a try when my new file server
    > arrives next Tuesday.
    >
    > I'm still discovering the intricacies of Linux distro lincensing. It seems
    > that RH has commercial subscription for updates or some such? It would be
    > nice if users can get free notification of updates. I'm quite happy not to
    > have the updates provided, ala RPM, Deb, etc. It's just as easy to go to the
    > source of the update and recompile patches, etc. into the necessary bits. As
    > long as I know that certain things need to be patched. Is there such a thing
    > out there?
    >
    > D.


    You are going to add pain to your life
    Used Debian "testing" and run apt-get update, apt-get upgrade regularly
    and let the package maintainers sort out the dependencies for you.
    shannon, Apr 24, 2005
    #7
  8. Dany P. Wu

    shannon Guest

    On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 07:51:54 +1200, Shane wrote:

    > On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 21:20:41 +1200, Dany P. Wu wrote:
    >
    >> Hi everyone,
    >>
    >> It's that time again for me. Time to replace the dead server at home!
    >>
    >> I'm tossing up as to what I would like to use. I have Win 2000 and 2003
    >> Server available but somehow they're not quite right. I deal with Microsoft
    >> everyday at work and don't really want to come home to any more if I can
    >> help it.
    >>
    >> I've laid my hands on Debian, Redhat and Slackware distros. Recently I have
    >> just discovered Fedora. Can anyone give me their opinions on this distro? I
    >> would like a standard console-based server, i.e. web, mail, ftp, and maybe
    >> Samba filesharing as well. Is this distro suitable? Can I get some kind of
    >> web-based remote admin for it?
    >>
    >> Any comments/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >> Dany.

    >
    > not knowing your skillset makes it harder to choose,
    > but whats stopping you giving them all a go and seeing for yourself which
    > best suits your needs?
    > all the distros are capable, all have their ups and downs, redhat (presume
    > you mean 9.0) is getting long in the tooth, slackware is my personal
    > favourite, and Debian has an _excellent_ reputation, although it puts
    > stability over functionality(?) (i mean new toys)
    > having said that there are ways and means
    > HTH


    Thats a common misconception about Debian, you need to choose your
    preferred release. Use "testing" or "unstable" or Ubuntu and you get all
    the new stuff "stable" is for rock solid production servers that don't get
    anything but security upgrades.
    shannon, Apr 24, 2005
    #8
  9. Dany P. Wu

    Shane Guest

    On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 10:58:33 +1200, Dany P. Wu wrote:

    > "Shane" <-a-geek.net> wrote in message
    > news:p-a-geek.net...
    >
    >> not knowing your skillset makes it harder to choose,
    >> but whats stopping you giving them all a go and seeing for yourself which
    >> best suits your needs?
    >> all the distros are capable, all have their ups and downs, redhat (presume
    >> you mean 9.0) is getting long in the tooth, slackware is my personal
    >> favourite, and Debian has an _excellent_ reputation, although it puts
    >> stability over functionality(?) (i mean new toys)
    >> having said that there are ways and means
    >> HTH

    >
    > Thanks for all the replies guys.
    >
    > I guess I should've mentioned that I've played with various distros of
    > Linux, on and off (mostly off), since kernel version 1.1.13 or so - early
    > '94 (or 5?). Back then I was tying up the machine for a day or so
    > recompiling kernels and other applications to suite my needs.
    >
    > It's just in the recent times I have only briefly played with RH 9.0 and
    > Debian. As you already said the former is getting a bit old, and I didn't
    > quite like the latter - just a personal opinion. I've looked around and
    > discovered two rather promising looking distros: Fedora and CentOS. I've
    > downloaded both of them and will give them a try when my new file server
    > arrives next Tuesday.
    >
    > I'm still discovering the intricacies of Linux distro lincensing. It seems
    > that RH has commercial subscription for updates or some such? It would be
    > nice if users can get free notification of updates. I'm quite happy not to
    > have the updates provided, ala RPM, Deb, etc. It's just as easy to go to the
    > source of the update and recompile patches, etc. into the necessary bits. As
    > long as I know that certain things need to be patched. Is there such a thing
    > out there?
    >
    > D.


    yum is what they use on redhat iirc
    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras_2fFedoraHOWTO

    for debian its
    apt-get update

    --

    Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked
    Shane, Apr 24, 2005
    #9
  10. Dany P. Wu

    Shane Guest


    > for debian its
    > apt-get update

    oops thats meant to be upgrade
    --

    Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked
    Shane, Apr 24, 2005
    #10
  11. Dany P. Wu

    shannon Guest

    On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 11:50:33 +1200, Shane wrote:

    >
    >> for debian its
    >> apt-get update

    > oops thats meant to be upgrade


    Apt-get update will notify you of the updates available though
    I'm using Debian testing as my home server and Ubuntu Hoary Hedgehog as
    the desktop client and synaptic/kynaptic on both as package manager,
    highly recommended.
    shannon, Apr 24, 2005
    #11
  12. Dany P. Wu

    Shane Guest

    On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 12:39:18 +1200, shannon wrote:

    > On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 11:50:33 +1200, Shane wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>> for debian its
    >>> apt-get update

    >> oops thats meant to be upgrade

    >
    > Apt-get update will notify you of the updates available though
    > I'm using Debian testing as my home server and Ubuntu Hoary Hedgehog as
    > the desktop client and synaptic/kynaptic on both as package manager,
    > highly recommended.


    I read something funny on the fedora link I posted
    fedora can use apt!

    --

    Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked
    Shane, Apr 24, 2005
    #12
  13. Dany P. Wu

    Dany P. Wu Guest

    "shannon" <> wrote in message news:426ad879$...
    > On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 10:58:33 +1200, Dany P. Wu wrote:
    >> Thanks for all the replies guys.
    >> I guess I should've mentioned that I've played with various distros of
    >> Linux, on and off (mostly off), since kernel version 1.1.13 or so -
    >> early '94 (or 5?). Back then I was tying up the machine for a day or so
    >> recompiling kernels and other applications to suite my needs.
    >> It's just in the recent times I have only briefly played with RH 9.0 and
    >> Debian. As you already said the former is getting a bit old, and I
    >> didn't quite like the latter - just a personal opinion. I've looked
    >> around and discovered two rather promising looking distros: Fedora
    >> and CentOS. I've downloaded both of them and will give them a try
    >> when my new file server arrives next Tuesday.
    >> I'm still discovering the intricacies of Linux distro lincensing. It
    >> seems that RH has commercial subscription for updates or some such?
    >> It would be nice if users can get free notification of updates. I'm
    >> quite happy not to have the updates provided, ala RPM, Deb, etc. It's
    >> just as easy to go to the source of the update and recompile patches,
    >> etc. into the necessary bits. As long as I know that certain things
    >> need to be patched. Is there such a thing out there?
    >> D.

    > You are going to add pain to your life
    > Used Debian "testing" and run apt-get update, apt-get upgrade regularly
    > and let the package maintainers sort out the dependencies for you.


    Aye, that's what I'm hoping to do. I tried RedHat 9.0 last year and it
    seemed to require subscription to get RH notifications. I was hoping Fedora
    will provide it for free.

    I definitely don't want to have to compile any binaries myself - unless it's
    absolutely necessary.

    D.
    Dany P. Wu, Apr 24, 2005
    #13
  14. In article <-a-geek.net>,
    Shane <-a-geek.net> wrote:

    >I read something funny on the fedora link I posted
    >fedora can use apt!


    Conectiva (now joined with Mandrake to form Mandriva) ported apt to work
    with RPMs. apt4rpm seemed to be particularly popular with SuSE users,
    though it sounds like Fedora has adopted it now.
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Apr 24, 2005
    #14
  15. In article <>,
    Gordon <> wrote:

    >Goo on you for trying something different.


    Goo on you too!
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Apr 24, 2005
    #15
  16. Dany P. Wu

    shannon Guest

    On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 12:41:45 +1200, Shane wrote:

    > On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 12:39:18 +1200, shannon wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 11:50:33 +1200, Shane wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>> for debian its
    >>>> apt-get update
    >>> oops thats meant to be upgrade

    >>
    >> Apt-get update will notify you of the updates available though
    >> I'm using Debian testing as my home server and Ubuntu Hoary Hedgehog as
    >> the desktop client and synaptic/kynaptic on both as package manager,
    >> highly recommended.

    >
    > I read something funny on the fedora link I posted
    > fedora can use apt!


    So can Suse, Solaris, MacOSX (fink), and
    http://apt4rpm.sourceforge.net/

    I suppose it depends on the repositories available though.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Packaging_Tool
    and the console ncurses front end
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptitude
    and the gtk+ front end
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synaptic
    which comes with these distributions
    http://www.nongnu.org/synaptic/links.html
    and the kde version
    http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=22850
    APT is also supported by kpackage
    http://www.general.uwa.edu.au/u/toivo/kpackage/
    shannon, Apr 24, 2005
    #16
  17. In article <>,
    "Dany P. Wu" <> wrote:

    >It's just in the recent times I have only briefly played with RH 9.0 and
    >Debian. As you already said the former is getting a bit old, and I didn't
    >quite like the latter - just a personal opinion. I've looked around and
    >discovered two rather promising looking distros: Fedora and CentOS. I've
    >downloaded both of them and will give them a try when my new file server
    >arrives next Tuesday.


    Have you considered Gentoo? That one concentrates on building everything
    from sources, to try to give you maximum opportunity to optimize and
    customize for your hardware.
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Apr 24, 2005
    #17
  18. Dany P. Wu

    Dany P. Wu Guest

    "Lawrence D¹Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > "Dany P. Wu" <> wrote:
    >>It's just in the recent times I have only briefly played with RH 9.0 and
    >>Debian. As you already said the former is getting a bit old, and I didn't
    >>quite like the latter - just a personal opinion. I've looked around and
    >>discovered two rather promising looking distros: Fedora and CentOS. I've
    >>downloaded both of them and will give them a try when my new file server
    >>arrives next Tuesday.

    > Have you considered Gentoo? That one concentrates on building everything
    > from sources, to try to give you maximum opportunity to optimize and
    > customize for your hardware.


    Yup! I considered Gentoo - very briefly! :eek:)

    I'm not greatly interested in customising and optimising to that degree
    anymore. Quite happy to just do the Linux equivalent of Windows Update
    (pardon my language...)

    D.
    Dany P. Wu, Apr 24, 2005
    #18
  19. Dany P. Wu

    AD. Guest

    On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 10:58:33 +1200, Dany P. Wu wrote:

    > Thanks for all the replies guys.
    >
    > I guess I should've mentioned that I've played with various distros of
    > Linux, on and off (mostly off), since kernel version 1.1.13 or so - early
    > '94 (or 5?). Back then I was tying up the machine for a day or so
    > recompiling kernels and other applications to suite my needs.


    My vote...

    Server: Debian Sarge (or Woody for the more paranoid).

    Desktop: Ubuntu Hoary

    --
    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Apr 24, 2005
    #19
  20. Dany P. Wu

    Phstpok Guest

    Dany P. Wu wrote:
    > "Lawrence D¹Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>In article <>,
    >>"Dany P. Wu" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>It's just in the recent times I have only briefly played with RH 9.0 and
    >>>Debian. As you already said the former is getting a bit old, and I didn't
    >>>quite like the latter - just a personal opinion. I've looked around and
    >>>discovered two rather promising looking distros: Fedora and CentOS. I've
    >>>downloaded both of them and will give them a try when my new file server
    >>>arrives next Tuesday.

    >>
    >>Have you considered Gentoo? That one concentrates on building everything
    >>from sources, to try to give you maximum opportunity to optimize and
    >>customize for your hardware.

    >
    >
    > Yup! I considered Gentoo - very briefly! :eek:)
    >
    > I'm not greatly interested in customising and optimising to that degree
    > anymore. Quite happy to just do the Linux equivalent of Windows Update
    > (pardon my language...)
    >
    > D.
    >
    >

    Here's an interesting PC World article

    http://tinyurl.com/abme7

    Rob
    Phstpok, Apr 24, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. joost68

    fedora core 1 and mozilla 1.4.1

    joost68, May 14, 2004, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    566
    Randy
    May 14, 2004
  2. Joe
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    492
    Jedi Fans
    Dec 27, 2005
  3. propel
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    461
  4. Scott Gravenhorst

    Mozilla Browser Won't Run on FC3 (Fedora Core 3)

    Scott Gravenhorst, Apr 12, 2006, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    588
    Jedi Fans
    Apr 12, 2006
  5. Dave

    Adobe Reader v5 on Fedora

    Dave, Feb 6, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    520
    °Mike°
    Feb 6, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page