On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:00:24PM -0600, Charles wrote:I appreciate the replies so far. I do not want to start a distro-war. I ain't interested, nor do I care about the GNOME vs. KDE conversation because I use neither.
I realize I am coming in a bit late, but would someone please expain *exactly why* RH should not be run on the enterprise?
No on can because the statement is false.
There are folk in the local linux user group that assert that RH simply cannot be made secure.
They're full of it. Oracle runs their internal business on Linux. Amazon runs their internal and external business on Linux. Do you think that Amazon would be crazy enough to put up an OS that can't be made secure?
However, I am concerned about the impression that RH is not a good choice as against debian, say. I run 3 RH boxes here at home. I manage 7 of them at work, along with 2 AIX boxes, a pair of Win2000 servcer boxes. The RH boxes and the AIX boxes seem to run forever.
So, let me re-phrase the question. What significant difference is there (if any) between RH8/9 outfitted compltetly open-source and RH secure server? Is secure server *NOT* open source. Can RH8/9 serve as a secure enterprise server system just as well as secure server? Is the fundamental difference the level of support?
Is Oracle using RH8/9? Is Amazon? Or are they using a commercially tweaked...enhanced...whatever version?
I am coming up on budget time for the next fiscal year, and any insights/information would be most welcome.
And thanks again!
Cheers-- Charles
-- Psyche-list mailing list Psyche-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
