Cristian Sava wrote:
To me it would be irrational to run Fedora rather than CentOS on a
server, since the chances of problems arising would be higher,
and I don't see any compensating advantages.
I run Fedora on laptops because there is a wider range of apps available,
but they are not apps
On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 11:59 +, Bill Oliver wrote:
I think being comfy with a distro is a big deal
Then Mandriva collapsed. I had to get used to Fedora. When Mageia
came out, I was tickled pink and immediately installed it -- only to
find that now I was in the exact opposite
HI
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I'm not quite clear why you would want to run virtual machines on a server?
To me, the basic requirement for a server is that it should provide
the services that are required by laptops, phones and other machines.
VM's on a server
On 04/22/2014 02:31 AM, Russell Miller wrote:
On Apr 21, 2014, at 10:14 PM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
On 04/22/2014 07:00 AM, Russell Miller wrote:
On Apr 21, 2014, at 9:52 PM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
IMO, this is *the cause*, why Fedora has lost against
Put more succinctly, there are some users that Fedora should lose because
they are only using Fedora
based on a lack of understanding of what Fedora is trying to accomplish. And
conversely, there are
some people who are marketing Fedora based on that same misunderstanding, and
causing
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Cristian Sava wrote:
I feel more comfortable with Fedora than with Centos and I run Fedora
servers for many years with great success.
Why?
To me it would be irrational to run Fedora rather than CentOS on a server,
since the chances of problems
On 04/18/2014 08:10 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 19:23:18 +0200
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
In first place, Fedora is distro, not a Red Hat colony nor the sandbox
to let Red Hat's uncooked ideas mature.
In your dreams, perhaps, but in the real world, that's exactly
what it is. In
On Apr 21, 2014, at 9:52 PM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
IMO, this is *the cause*, why Fedora has lost against its competitors.
I don't agree. Fedora doesn't have competitors. It fills a niche which I am
not sure that
any other distribution truly meets. Sure, some have
On 04/22/2014 07:00 AM, Russell Miller wrote:
On Apr 21, 2014, at 9:52 PM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
IMO, this is *the cause*, why Fedora has lost against its competitors.
I don't agree. Fedora doesn't have competitors.
It's competitors are end-user distros: Debian,
As are many things...
Time is the only truly non-renewable resource.
--Russell
Which we seem never to have enough of. :)
Cheers.
Happy chocolate day.
Robin
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
On 19 April 2014 04:31, Thomas Cameron thomas.came...@camerontech.com wrote:
On 04/15/2014 10:40 PM, Digimer wrote:
Please don't do that. Fedora is awesome, but it's a desktop OS, not a
server OS. The life cycle is way to short and it's not hardened like a
server-focused distro. RHEL/CentOS
On Apr 19, 2014, at 6:21 AM, Dave Ihnat dih...@dminet.com wrote:
I'm not currently running Fedora, either--it's just not in the mix for
the five frankenstations and the server that I use for home and business
right now. But I've been in the field since I got my degree in '76--that's
almost
On 2014-04-19 06:25, Tim wrote:
Rick Stevens wrote:
Fedora is, by definition, bleeding edge.
Ralf Corsepius:
No, Fedora is not supposed to the bleeding edge. It's supposed to be the
cutting edge, with some occasional warts sometimes.
I would say, by way of what it actually is, it is
On 2014-04-16 22:19, Rachmayanto Surjadi wrote:
Thanks a lot to everybody who responded my question. I got the
impression that for production better use non-Fedora (Centos, RH) so
as to minimize the frequent-updates work. For development stage it
seems that using Fedora would not be a big issue.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:40:00PM -0400, Digimer wrote:
We are developing internal software using MySql dB and are planning to
use Fedora for the server.
Please don't do that. Fedora is awesome, but it's a desktop OS, not
a server OS. The life cycle is way to short and it's not hardened
This
On 04/18/2014 02:10 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:40:00PM -0400, Digimer wrote:
We are developing internal software using MySql dB and are planning to
use Fedora for the server.
Please don't do that. Fedora is awesome, but it's a desktop OS, not
a server OS. The life
On 04/18/2014 05:02 PM, Tim wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 18 April 2014, Matthew Miller sent:
Fedora is not a desktop-only OS, and can be (and *is*) used in many
serious server contexts, even in production. You need to know what
you're getting into and be willing to cope with the 13-month
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Matthew Miller
mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
For more, see the Fedora Server Working Group:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server
Formed in October 2013.
*cough* *cough*
FC
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change
On Fri, 18 Apr 2014, Sudhir Khanger wrote:
Would you recommend using something like Ubuntu instead of Fedora for work
related system?
I moved from Ubuntu to Arch to Fedora. Fedora provides both latest innovations
in Linux world and ease of use over something like Arch Linux.
I have
On 04/15/2014 10:40 PM, Digimer wrote:
Please don't do that. Fedora is awesome, but it's a desktop OS, not a
server OS. The life cycle is way to short and it's not hardened like a
server-focused distro. RHEL/CentOS would make a much better OS, and if
you needed something newer than it
On 04/18/2014 12:59 AM, Robin Laing wrote:
As you have read, it would be better to use CentOS over Fedora.
s/CentOS/RHEL/
Let's suggest supporting the company which pays for this list and the
vast majority of the developers who write Fedora, what say?
TC
--
users mailing list
On 04/18/2014 11:33 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 04/18/2014 05:25 AM, Ralf Corsepius issued this missive:
On 04/18/2014 02:10 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:40:00PM -0400, Digimer wrote:
We are developing internal software using MySql dB and are planning to
use Fedora for
On Apr 18, 2014, at 8:43 PM, Thomas Cameron thomas.came...@camerontech.com
wrote:
That is neither the charter of the project, nor my personal experience.
I use Fedora for my daily driver at home, I use it for dev work at work,
my 7 11 year old daughters use it for daily driving on their
On Apr 18, 2014, at 9:40 PM, David dgbo...@gmail.com wrote:
If you do not 'like Fedora' I would suggest that you find some other
distro of Linux that you do. And leave this list. And? Join the list(s)
of your latest Linux darling and sing your love there.
Thank you for your suggestion.
On 17/04/14 01:41 AM, Roger wrote:
This conversation has piqued my curiosity.
Fedora becomes end of life. I'm guessing that means the kernel and
associated components go EOL.
What would be the difference between an EOL well serviced and managed
Fedora 19 and newly installed CentOS6.5 as far as
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Roger are...@bigpond.com wrote:
What would be the difference between an EOL well serviced and managed Fedora
19 and newly installed CentOS6.5 as far as internet safety and security
goes?
F19 is still current, so the comparison would be with F18. In a
nutshell:
On 04/17/2014 07:07 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Roger are...@bigpond.com wrote:
What would be the difference between an EOL well serviced and managed Fedora
19 and newly installed CentOS6.5 as far as internet safety and security
goes?
F19 is still current,
Allegedly, on or about 17 April 2014, Roger sent:
What would one have to look out for if one does keep an EOL Fedora for
a number of years?
You wouldn't be able to install new applications on it. e.g. If, years
later, someone develops something that sounds interesting to you, it
will depend
On 17/04/14 09:59 AM, Steve Searle wrote:
Around 02:53pm on Thursday, April 17, 2014 (UK time), Tim wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 17 April 2014, Roger sent:
What would one have to look out for if one does keep an EOL Fedora for
a number of years?
You wouldn't be able to install new
Allegedly, on or about 17 April 2014, Steve Searle sent:
I would think the lack of any security updates would be a more serious
problem than this.
Me too, but they've already been covered.
I have one machine that uses an old OS, because it does what I need.
Since it's not on any network, and
On Thu, 17 Apr 2014, Roger wrote:
What would one have to look out for if one does keep an EOL Fedora for a
number of years?
Roger
I *assume* (though do not know) that you wouldn't keep getting library updates,
so that eventually updated apps wouldn't run even if you downloaded them by
On 18.04.2014 00:48, Fernando Cassia wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Rachmayanto Surjadi
rachmayan...@sanatel.com wrote:
We are developing internal software using MySql dB and are planning to use
Fedora for the server.
My advice, grab either CentOS http://www.centos.org/ or
On 04/17/2014 06:29 PM, Digimer wrote:
On 17/04/14 09:59 AM, Steve Searle wrote:
Around 02:53pm on Thursday, April 17, 2014 (UK time), Tim wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 17 April 2014, Roger sent:
What would one have to look out for if one does keep an EOL Fedora for
a number of years?
I
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 8:07 PM, poma pomidorabelis...@gmail.com wrote:
OL or LOL? :)
Red Hat Announces Availability of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Beta
December 11, 2013
The RHEL 6.5 source was out Nov 21
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 2:43 AM, Rachmayanto Surjadi
rachmayan...@sanatel.com wrote:
The question is how do we know that this hardware (motherboard, CPU) really
support Fedora version 18 or 19? We are looking at mobo from Asus or Intel or
Gigabyte, but did not find firm answer. We did not
On 04/16/2014 06:29 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 2:43 AM, Rachmayanto Surjadi
rachmayan...@sanatel.com wrote:
The question is how do we know that this hardware (motherboard, CPU) really
support Fedora version 18 or 19? We are looking at mobo from Asus or Intel or
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014, Rachmayanto Surjadi wrote:
Hi all:
We are developing internal software using MySql dB and are planning to use
Fedora for the server.
The question is how do we know that this hardware (motherboard, CPU) really
support Fedora version 18 or 19? We are looking at mobo from
On 16 April 2014 05:45, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
On 04/16/2014 05:40 AM, Digimer wrote:
On 15/04/14 09:43 PM, Rachmayanto Surjadi wrote:
Hi all:
We are developing internal software using MySql dB and are planning to
use Fedora for the server.
Please don't do that.
...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Ralf Corsepius
Sent: 17 April 2014 00:25
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Need advice
On 04/16/2014 11:12 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
On 16 April 2014 05:45, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
On 04/16/2014 05:40
Thanks a lot to everybody who responded my question.
I got the impression that for production better use non-Fedora (Centos, RH) so
as to minimize the frequent-updates work. For development stage it seems that
using Fedora would not be a big issue. I will consult my programmer about this
Hi all:
We are developing internal software using MySql dB and are planning to use
Fedora for the server.
The question is how do we know that this hardware (motherboard, CPU) really
support Fedora version 18 or 19? We are looking at mobo from Asus or Intel
or Gigabyte, but did not find firm
On 15/04/14 09:43 PM, Rachmayanto Surjadi wrote:
Hi all:
We are developing internal software using MySql dB and are planning to
use Fedora for the server.
Please don't do that. Fedora is awesome, but it's a desktop OS, not a
server OS. The life cycle is way to short and it's not hardened
On 04/16/2014 05:40 AM, Digimer wrote:
On 15/04/14 09:43 PM, Rachmayanto Surjadi wrote:
Hi all:
We are developing internal software using MySql dB and are planning to
use Fedora for the server.
Please don't do that. Fedora is awesome, but it's a desktop OS, not a
server OS.
I do not agree
On 10/23/2010 09:54 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
Anyway, you seem to be right! Restarting X purged most of the swap, from
1.3 GB it went down to 31.4 MB. And the system regained responsiveness.
Whatever is using swap is probably the application using the most RAM.
Take a look at 'System Monitor'
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
On Sunday, October 24, 2010 04:18:02 stan wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 02:38:23 +0100
Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com wrote:
I am experiencing a gradual performance drop problem --- having a
machine running 24/7, after some time (say, two weeks) the system
becomes
On Sunday, October 24, 2010 12:36:52 stan wrote:
There is probably a tool designed for this specific purpose, though
I'm not aware of it.
On Saturday, October 23, 2010 21:38:23 Marko Vojinovic wrote:
I'm at a loss where and how to look for memory and performance
drain.
Just run top(1) to see
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 02:38:23 +0100
Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com wrote:
I am experiencing a gradual performance drop problem --- having a
machine running 24/7, after some time (say, two weeks) the system
becomes increasingly slow, in terms of desktop response.
snip
The symptoms appear
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 02:38:23AM +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
Hi folks! :-)
I am experiencing a gradual performance drop problem --- having a machine
running 24/7, after some time (say, two weeks) the system becomes
increasingly
slow, in terms of desktop response. It takes several
I have an HP laserjet for BW document printing, but I've never experimented
with color lasers on photo paper, so can't attest to their print quality,
either.
I do various bits of decal, logo and vinyl printing with laser along with
the odd photo. It's cheaper than inkjet per copy, its more
Tim:
That has to be one of the biggest, and widest, perpetuated rip-offs,
Darr:
http://efillink.com/
Unfortunately, refilling isn't really an option for some printers.
For instance, my old Hewlett Packard had combined ink tanks and printing
heads. By the time the ink had run low, the head
On Saturday, 25 September, 2010 @08:29 zulu, Tim scribed:
Unfortunately, refilling isn't really an option for some printers.
That site's not really all about refills.
CIS = Continuous Ink System
e.g. http://www.efillink.info/index.php?p=1_188
You can top off the external tanks before they
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 19:49 -0700, JD wrote:
Be ready to shell out a lot every time you need cartridges,
and you are going to need them often if you print a lot.
They do not hold a lot of ink.
That has to be one of the biggest, and widest, perpetuated rip-offs, for
a long time. I was so sick
On 09/24/2010 03:16 PM, Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 19:49 -0700, JD wrote:
Be ready to shell out a lot every time you need cartridges,
and you are going to need them often if you print a lot.
They do not hold a lot of ink.
That has to be one of the biggest, and widest, perpetuated
g wrote:
On 09/23/2010 12:50 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
I currently have a HP Photosmart C5580 which is a decent all-in-one
snip
Since in general HP printers are well supported, one of the printers
I'm looking at is the HP Photosmart B8550[1].
My inlaws have one of the Epson Artisan printers
On Friday, 24 September, 2010 @07:16 zulu, Tim scribed:
That has to be one of the biggest, and widest, perpetuated rip-offs,
http://efillink.com/
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
I currently have a HP Photosmart C5580 which is a decent all-in-one
printer that I only paid $99 for but the photo printing leaves
something to be desired. My wife is a art hobbyist so I'm looking for
a decent dedicated photo printer and I've found two in my price range
(about $200).
Since in
On 09/23/2010 12:50 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
I currently have a HP Photosmart C5580 which is a decent all-in-one
snip
Since in general HP printers are well supported, one of the printers
I'm looking at is the HP Photosmart B8550[1].
My inlaws have one of the Epson Artisan printers and it
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 4:03 PM, g gel...@bellsouth.net wrote:
i will make a few suggestions.
stay with a good name brand. in order of personal choice based on
what i have seen, hp, cannon, epson.
laser jet over ink jet.
get a printer that is not an 'all in one'. you will pay a more,
but
On 09/23/2010 07:41 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 4:03 PM, ggel...@bellsouth.net wrote:
i will make a few suggestions.
stay with a good name brand. in order of personal choice based on
what i have seen, hp, cannon, epson.
laser jet over ink jet.
get a printer that is
On 09/24/2010 02:49 AM, JD wrote:
On 09/23/2010 07:41 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 4:03 PM, ggel...@bellsouth.net wrote:
stay with a good name brand. in order of personal choice based on
what i have seen, hp, cannon, epson.
snip
I didn't realize at first the Epson was a
On 09/23/2010 08:28 PM, g wrote:
On 09/24/2010 02:49 AM, JD wrote:
On 09/23/2010 07:41 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 4:03 PM, ggel...@bellsouth.net wrote:
stay with a good name brand. in order of personal choice based on
what i have seen, hp, cannon, epson.
snip
I
On 09/24/2010 03:54 AM, JD wrote:
snip
I shelled out 500 bucks for a Brother MFC9840CDW Laser MultiFunction
printer.
yes, laser/toner due cost a lot more, and, a whole different ball game.
i do like dry ink over wet ink and in most cases, they give a good quality
print. not as high a dpi,
62 matches
Mail list logo
