On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Craig White <craigwhite@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Like RHEL/CentOS, Ubuntu LTS is absolutely appropriate for server use.
> In fact, it's sort of refreshing to set up a new server that isn't
> overloaded with bloat from the very start. Setting up a new VMWare image
> w/ Ubuntu Server takes at most 10 minutes whereas doing the same w/
> CentOS 5 takes almost an hour (easier just to clone my base install copy
> kept for just that purpose).
>
> I actually use Fedora for my Desktop. It dual boots to Ubuntu but I
> don't often use it. The only reason that I ever saw people using Fedora
> for production was because the RHEL/CentOS software packages were so
> completely out-of-date.
Both CentOS and Ubuntu server installs take as long for me. Are you
comparing similar levels of install?!
(I think that your reply about Fedora is about a post where two people
are shocked that I'm supporting Fedora in production. In that
particular company, it's just a loyalty and familiarity issue,
although I'm sure that if I migrated to CentOS, for example, the DBA'd
wine about versions and what have you. Also, I've found server
installs of the latest versions of Fedora and Ubuntu stable; it's when
you add X and a DE that you can end up with issues.)
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
