Dan, that's good to know, thank you. I also found your blog post [1] interesting and informative. I guess, I was kind of curious why Apache had to run as opensrf, but not curious enough to ask.
Thinking strategically, fewer barriers and more documentation for running Evergreen on various Linux distributions is a plus, but like you say, return on investment is a consideration. I think any steps in that direction, like your work with SELinux, are helpful though. So, why does Apache have to run as opensrf user? [1] http://coffeecode.net/archives/259-Leaving-SELinux-in-enforcing-mode-with-Evergreen-on-Fedora-17.html. Alexey On Sep 20, 2012, at 14:00 , Dan Scott wrote: > I'm likely the only person running Fedora - on my laptop - and I would not > recommend it for a production server as it has a very limited support > lifetime. > > I know there are some sites running RHEL or white box variations thereof, but > there's not really an active champion of those distros and thus no longer > appear in the prereq installer or README. > > I have some hope that my work on packaging dependencies for Fedora and > figuring out SELinux (per a recent blog post) will help with RHEL eventually, > although at present I'm not targeting EPEL as the return on invested effort > is not high. > > Beyond that, there was some work on FreeBSD support by Bill Erickson and > Jason Stephenson. > > On Sep 20, 2012 2:29 PM, "Lazar, Alexey Vladimirovich" > <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello. > > What organizations out there are running Evergreen in production environments > on OS other than Ubuntu or Debian? I am considering testing some of the > documentation I'm editing on an additional OS and was curious what would > actually be useful. I noticed the install instructions for OpenSRF and > Evergreen include Fedora. Is that because someone is running it for a > production Evergreen system? > > Thanks. Alexey Lazar PALS Information System Developer and Integrator 507-389-2907 http://www.mnpals.org/
