Chris Martin wrote:
From my experiences with FC2, it's just as stable was FC1. Granted I compiled my own kernel with 8K stacks, but other than that I get great up times from it. In fact, the only time my system goes down is when I need to do hardware work on it. I use it as my desktop/gaming/internet/development box and it runs just fine. I think most of these complaints about being unstable come from not updating the distro or from running it on flaky hardware. My experience with FC2 has been very enjoyable.Russell Senior wrote:
You ought to realize that when you boot into XP, your commercial site goes offline.
And booting to XP is never quick, remember you'll have to download Windows, Anti-Virus, Ad-Aware, etc updates just to "feel" safe.
I definately recommend outsourcing the commercial site hosting. I use a shared host and it works great, but something like pdxcolo gives you more control <* drooling at the thought of root >.
Then use your home box for testing, maybe even host a smaller, less critical site to get your feet wet hosting yourself.
From what I've heard, FC2 is UN-stable. Probably greatly depending on hardware/software. The dual boot bug is preventable, you might find this helpful if your decide to go for it.
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2004-May/msg00908.html
Personally, FC1 is awesome. I dual boot FC1 with XP (although I rarely ever need to boot XP) and it works great. You might want to remember to create an extra FAT32 partition to share files between OS'!
_______________________________________________
PDXLUG mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pdxlug.org/mailman/listinfo/pdxlug
