i have a general question about linux in between fedora and RHEL

[roadorange]

hi. when i ask question about linux and ppl usually ask me why do i use RHEL.
i don't know why either. I plan to use RHEL to make a website and for other server experiements.

my question: does it really matter which red hat linux distribution i used? do they all have same linux server functionality and same powerful feature??? are there any features that RHEL has and fedora don't?

another reason i choose RHEL because the word "enterprise" sound awesome. lolzzzzz

plz don't tease me, i am linux beginner. lolzzzzz

edited: the word "enterpeise" sound very powerful -.-"". it sounds like this linux has many stable and powerful feature that other linux don't have. it makes me use it

[Icarus]

lolzzzzz?
nevermind
Fedora is more cutting edge and not as stable and well tested as RHEL is, which is why it makes more sense to use RHEL as a server and coporate workstations. Fedora is more for the home user that likes to play around and use the latest

[Syngin]

Hehe almost flame bait but Icarus, mature as always didn't rise to it.

Another point about Enterprise is the up2date registration, Not prefering Redhat, I'm not the one to ask regarding the various Redhat possibilities. From what I hear, there was an issue with using Yum with Redhat servers (Redhat's position) RHEL requires a license of some sort. If you want the same functionality without paying for the license, CentOS seems to be the distro in that direction.

Me, I'm more of a Debian guy for servers, Ubuntu or stock Debian testing for a desktops.

Edit: Unforunately, you seem like the reason marketing departments have as much of a budget as they do.

[mrrangerman43]

I hope it's ok for me to chime in with some questions about server OS's?

Ubuntu has there desktop version but they also have a server 6.06.iso install cd, Debian also has a option to install just for server. My questions are,

Is a linux server install just lacking x11 and a WM or does it also come with other packages that are not included with a desktop OS install?

And also, can a desktop install have the needed packages installed and then be used for a server?

I don't mean to sound totaly ignorant, but I've never realy worked with a server, and I know "cough" windows '"cough" has server OS's that are somewhat different from there desktop OS's.

[soulestream]

Packages that come with server or desktop installs differ depending upon the distro. Most of the time server installs will come with things like samba, openldap, apache, etc already installed. Desktop installs have media players, games, etc installed.

Ubuntu server has the nice "install LAMP" feature which installs a base linux server install, apache, PHP, and MYSQL. Nice for setting up a little web server.


Soule

[mrrangerman43]

Soule

Thank you
I kind of thought it was like that, I'm planing on setting up a file server soon, and am tring to learn as much as I can before I start.

[banzaikai]

As a devout Fedora/RedHat user, I feel the need to chime in on this one...

Icarus:
Fedora is more cutting edge and not as stable and well tested as RHEL

Myth. If you download the "beta", "test", or "testing" version of FC, then this may be true. If you stick with the release versions, then it's every bit as stable. What throws people off is that the FC team isn't afraid to drop things that make no sense, and add things that do. If this makes it "cutting edge" to you, then so be it. All I can say is that RH7, 9, FC1, FC3, FC4 (running on this very machine), and FC5 have all run smoothly. The only machine I haven't been able to install FC5 on was a Gateway Essential P.O.S. with the i810 chipset. The same disks installed flawlessly on a Compaq with i810 (DC-133 CGC), so it was definitely something going on with the Gateway (and, specifically, X.org video drivers).

mrrangerman43
And also, can a desktop install have the needed packages installed and then be used for a server?

If you're asking about FC, then you can use the default install (Workstation), or you can hit the "Configure Install Packages Now" option in Anaconda (installer). Once in there, you can either click on the "Web/File Server" to select the most common, or just wander around the package list and pick your poison. If you select everything, kiss about 8-9GB of HD space goodbye (and you'll need about that much to download and install the updates). FC also allows you to install as a Workstation now, and add packages later - just re-run Anaconda, and it'll see you have installed already, and ask if you'd like to add more packages. There's also an "Add/Remove Applications" utility (like Windows) in the "Desktop -> System Settings" menu. Oh, and YumEx can be used, too! So, you're certainly not stuck with any type of install.

And about those updates...

I know that RH/Fedora has been using yum since RH9/FC1, and you could even install apt/synaptic to boot. The problem was that if a package listing wasn't exactly the same as that from another repository (say, livna), then it wound up being installed twice - and things went downhill from there. If you get RHEL, then stick with the RHEL server. If you decide on FC, then yum/pup is configured for the appropriate servers, and a few extras can be added safely (use livna only if you can't find it elsewhere!).

I now have an 11-year old girl, her 17-year old brother, another 16-year old cousin, a 19-year old nephew, and a 50+-year old grandmother running Fedora. They're all Windows converts, and are having relatively few problems with it (most deal with "unlearning" Windows). Of course, none are running servers, so your mileage may vary.

banzai "tip o' the {red} hat - wag o' the finger" kai

[mrrangerman43]

banzaikai

Thank you, My question was a linux general OS question. From the reading I have done, it sounds like a server install has the base OS with all the needed packages for running a server but lacks the xserver and WM media etc.that a workstation has by default. I would guess thats to keep things simple and use less resources, So I was wondering if that is true, then a workstation only lacks the needed server packages, and can be used for a server, if those needed server packages are installed, but, will use more resources. (Because x and a wm are running)
Am I right in my thinking?

Dan

[banzaikai]

Kinda.

Ya gotta start thinking "Linux".

It doesn't matter what you've got installed - it's what you let run that hogs the resources. Yes, I use the "Install Everything" option with RH/FC (HD space permitting), but it doesn't mean I wait fifty years for all that stuff to boot up. After the install, I just enable/disable the things I want running, and leave the other packages sit there until they're needed. In these days of 120GB drives for $50, having the OS eat up 10GB isn't really much. Although, I'd recommend going through the package list and checking for redundant things (who needs twenty different text editors?). Fedora, for instance, will install X.org and Gnome WM even if the server option is selected (they include many GUI tools to do the configuring, or you can do everything via terminal).

Besides, you can always use rpm/yum/apt to remove a package as easily as it installs.

So, yes, Linux distros allow you to "get there from here", even if you don't know where "here" is.

{Say, are you in the U.P. or down in the mitten?}

banzai "GPS" kai

[mrrangerman43]

Ya gotta start thinking "Linux".

Believe it or not I am starting to do just that, but sometimes it's overwhelming what GNU/linux has to offer.

This server I'm putting together is more for learning than anything, and having never setup a network, I'll have a lot of learning to do. I just reinstalled Ubuntu server 6.06 on this system because I figured it would have just about everything I will need to start. But I think I may at some point install Xorg and a light WM so as to try some of the gui apps, but for the moment I'm going to try working with the CL.
So I hope none of my questions are out of place.

{Say, are you in the U.P. or down in the mitten?}

Well if you are within a few miles of the location you have on your post header, Location: 43.46N 83.52W which my guess is a good fishing spot in the bay, I'm about 25-30 miles south of that location, just east of the German town.

[banzaikai]

sometimes it's overwhelming what GNU/linux has to offer.

Tell me about it. Everytime I get the new metadata (md) from the update repositories, I'm amazed at all the new projects. On one of the family member's boxes, I put enough games for the grandkids on it - to the point that I could hum the entire Final Jeopardy! theme while waiting for it to get done scrolling down. Grandma was impressed.

So I hope none of my questions are out of place.

Not at all. Sure, there'll be a big debate over CLI vs. GUI, but the bottom line is that it'll do what you want it to. If you're used to Windows, then I suggest installing Xorg/KDE/Gnome and a few GUI tools for server config. If you're not used to anything, then I'd stick to doing just what you're doing.

my guess is a good fishing spot in the bay

Actually, in the city which shares it's name with that of the bay, river, county, and valley. Still, you're not too far away...

banzai "Tokushima's Sister" kai