Fedora Makes a Terrible Server?

[Les Mikesell]

Roger Heflin wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Fedora ships buggy kernels. As stated previously this is more
>>> upstream's fault, 
>>
>> Beg your pardon, but just because someone writes broken code that 
>> _does not_ force a distribution to ship it.
>>
> 
> The problem is that the enterprise OS's ship buggy kernels too,

Yes, but they very, very rarely introduce new bugs in an update that 
breaks a previously working system.

> I have 
> found at least one bug in most of the recent enterprise kernels (RHEL3, 
> RHEL4, RHEL5 and SLES9-never tested SLES10), and some of those bugs were 
> very very ugly had at least one of them had long since been fixed 
> upstream, and at least one of those bugs *NEVER* existed in the 
> kernel.org kernels at all.

And the timeline between reporting the bug and getting the fix was...?

> And lets take RHEL5 initial release, it did not support file systems 
> larger then 8TB (ext3 only, no XFS), it did not support Areca and 3ware 
> PCIe controllers even though those drivers had been out for 6+ months at 
> the time they shipped RHEL5, and those are most definitely enterprise 
> boards.   And the second you add a driver and/or XFS on to RHEL5 you are 
> now tainted and *UNSUPPORTED*.

Do you have some point here - like a system that always supports 
everything and never fails?  I usually don't have as much of a problem 
having to fiddle with a new machine where you obviously aren't already 
relying on it or getting known-supported hardware when I don't have time 
to fiddle as I do with updates breaking previously working things.  But, 
have you tried the Centosplus kernels that put xfs and the drivers that 
rhel removes back?

-- 
    Les Mikesell
      lesmiksell at gmail.com