November 6, 2018 5:18 AM, "Liam Proven" <lproven@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 at 05:16, Alexander von Gluck IV
<kallisti5@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I really want to find a hard lesson in all of this and figure out a more
reliable strategy going
forward.
I do not wish to start an OS advocacy war, but even speaking as a
former Red Hat employee (and current SUSE one), Fedora is *not* a
suitable distribution for servers.
When you said half a dozen messages ago "going to upgrade F28 to F29,
only expecting ~8 min downtime", I was incredulous.
Fedora is a technology testbed distro. It is bleeding-edge by design;
it has no stable versions; and it regularly replaces or rewrites its
packaging tools.
If you are wedded to the Red Hat tooling, then CentOS would be a much
better choice.
If not, I personally would recommend either Ubuntu LTS releases or
Debian. In fact, given my personal experiences with systemd on
desktops and laptops, I'd suggest Devuan, which eliminates systemd. My
Haiku box dual-boots with Devuan (and Oberon and PC DOS 7.1) and I am
very impressed with Devuan so far. This week I upgraded Devuan 1 to
Devuan 2 and switched desktop environments from LXDE to XFCE, and it
was completely painless and nothing went wrong at any stage. I now
have a newer OS, a tiny bit more disk space, and everything works
exactly as it did.
I know people use Fedora for servers, but really, it should be an
evaluation tool, not a production one. The purpose of Fedora is for
evaluating new Linux technology, both for Red Hat and for its users,
and that is basically all. Anything else is marketing (i.e. lies).
If you actually want something to work with no surprises, use a distro
where stability is the focus.
