Marti, Robert wrote: >> bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of m.roth@xxxxxxxxx >> Burke, Thomas (ES) wrote: >> > [mailto:redhat-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of m.roth@xxxxxxxxx >> > Marti, Robert wrote: >> >>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Burke, Thomas (ES) >> >>> >> >>> I'm seriously considering upgrading my server to Fedora. All the >> <snip> >> > I concur. I would *NEVER* use fedora on a real server - it's bleeding >> > edge, not leading edge. If uptime is more important than the n33t3st, >> > c00l3st f38tur3s (esp. when they don't always work), use something >> > that's behind the times, like RHEL or CentOS. >> > >> > Well... The upgrade will be from RH 6.2.... So yeah, I'm not real >> > concerned with latest & greatest. >> > >> > But my uptime has been near 100% over the last 10 years or so... >> >> So, why are you even considering it... wait, are do you mean RH 6.2 (10 >> years old), or RHEL, in which case, I didn't think 6.2 was out, only 6.1? > > He's likely being honest and saying it's a 10 year old box. That's a bad > thing. Get it on *anything* current... and if it's been on the internet > for 10 years, you should make sure it's actually still yours. Why? Until Aug of '09, I had a firewall/router box, running RH 9 (Shrike). Now, admittedly, it *was* a firewall/router, and I'd run Bastille Linux on it (which is a set of hardening scripts, not a distro), and to the best of my knowledge, having started that on 5.2? 6? all with Bastille, I never had an intrusion, and had been on broadband for about 10 years. mark -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
