Dear Linux Users
Can we start Fedora 14 File Server in TEXT mode after having installed in text mode? If yes, how?
We used to install up to Fedora 10 in text only mode and also get it started in text mode. But had to start installing in graphic mode as the text mode install from Fedora 11 onwards no longer offers partitioning and package selection.
Our knowledge of Linux is limited and its been a long time I passed my engineering (20 years), so kindly pardon my limited abilities in Linux.
Regards
Kshitiz
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Kshitiz kshitij_kotak@hotmail.com wrote:
If this setup is for production then please use CentOS instead (based on RHEL); the system admin tools are same as those found in Fedora.
Fedora is a community distribution and it lacks long term support.
To boot in text console mode, (as root) edit /etc/inittab file and change the "default" run level to 3.
Our knowledge of Linux is limited and its been a long time I passed my engineering (20 years), so kindly pardon my limited abilities in Linux.
The Learning process should never stop. I completed my engg. much before you did and I am still learning :)
-- Arun Khan
On Wednesday 30 March 2011 15:25:47 Arun Khan wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Kshitiz kshitij_kotak@hotmail.com
wrote:
;-)
31 yrs banging electronics, both analog and digital, 26 yrs with microprocessors. That, my dear op is a HUGE advantage.
Op, Your years gives you an "unfair" advantage (most youngsters would not know how to use a bunch of ttls ;-E ). You will be surprised how easy it is.
If you are running an OS on servers always use a stable distro. My personal preference is Debian stable.
Thank you both, Arun and JTD. Will try it out.
Help me solve this puzzle based on your varied preferences: Yes, we deploy High Availability file server and mirror for small & medium enterprises, so yes: production environment.
1. CentOS or Debian? 2. HCL problems? Fedora 10 doesn't work on Intel 3430 Motherboard with DDR3, simply gives out syncloss display. How frequently do these OS support new hardware?
Pl advise.
Once again, thank you for your help. This is a wonderful group. Tell me how I can be of help.
On Wednesday 30 March 2011 08:26 PM, Kshitiz wrote:
Debian has a slightly newer kernel and good for detecting newer hardware compared to CentOS.
I just installed Debian 6 on 2 different machines and it has the 2.6.32 kernel, just like Ubuntu 10.04.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:16 PM, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:
Debian has a slightly newer kernel and good for detecting newer hardware compared to CentOS.
It depends on the version number. Even though the CentOS 5.x is on kernel 2.6.18, "selected" drivers from the newer kernels are back ported to the 2.6.18 in each point release.
Keep in mind that it is geared for servers and therefore it may not have the drivers for the newer desktop motherboards. For server grade systems, I have not seen any installation complaints (on the CentOS mailing list).
-- Arun Khan
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Kshitiz kshitij_kotak@hotmail.com wrote:
Personally, I am comfortable with both distros. Debian has a huge repository of packages ( > 25K) whereas CentOS is based on upstream source RPM that are part of the RHEL. The default package list is enough for most server type installation. There are "add-on" repos for CentOS. Both distros have point releases to support newer hardware.
Fedora 10 is obsolete. The Fedora support cycle is 18 month IIRC. For production servers you should use server class hardware and a distribution with LTS. Check with the vendor for HCL. The big three are reasonably good at support for RHEL and Novell SLES. Find the equivalent kernel in Debian or CentOS and the chances are pretty good either distro will install.
HTH -- Arun Khan
On Wednesday 30 Mar 2011, Kshitiz wrote:
I use Debian Testing on all production servers, haven't had a problem in the past 10 years at least. Also a bit of a Debian fan, so the next part can be taken with as much salt as you please:
I heard that CentOS is losing developers, which is not good news for a community-supported OS. If that is true, then CentOS would be that much lower in the list of preferred FOSS server operating systems. Can someone please confirm or deny the rumour?
Regards,
-- Raj
On Thursday 31 March 2011 07:32:36 Raj Mathur (राज माथुर) wrote:
The recent mangling of patches by RH may have something to do with it (if true). But goes to show that given a need to grow profits, (and all the corollaries that go with it), it is best to avoid a "corporate distro" if you are not paying them for the support.
IMO debian is the only suitable distro due to the politics of business and technology.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 10:17 AM, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
AFAIK, that really does not affect centos, since centos usually do not mess with the patches that RedHat releases in each of their kernels, they just do an rpm rebuild. The Mangling of patches is squarely targeted at OEL, since it will make it more expensive for them to steal RedHat's support clients since they will now have to allocate developers to either patch the kernels from scratch or reverse engineer which patches among the ones RedHat and others submit upstream are in this specific kernel release. Note, RedHat are still submitting the patches upstream individually, so with a few really good devs, the reverse engineering process CAN be done.
In terms of losing devs, its hard to say, since centos was always rather loosely knit. However, the slow progress on http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/AuditStatus does not make me feel good about a timely 6.0 release. In any case, I've seen that for most installs, unless they are internet facing, i can live with Fedora on the server. Yes it means i do a yearly upgrade, but it's a small price to pay, especially now that fedora's upgrades mean very little downtime and are smoother than ever.
Regards R. K. Rajeev
On 31 March 2011 10:41, Rajeev R. K. rajeevrk@gmail.com wrote:
Agree very much that fedora upgrades have become smooth !
On Thu, 2011-03-31 at 10:17 +0530, jtd wrote:
I had flirted with fedora 14 for a server as the lenny libraries were much too old and it was a pain installing newer libraries. With squeeze I am back to debian.
2011/3/31 Raj Mathur (राज माथुर) raju@linux-delhi.org:
+1. I started using Debian from last year and put in testing (what is now Squeeze) in a few production gateways/firewalls. No issues so far. The systems are just humming along. I am slowly converting my desktops to Debian as well :) At client sites, end users have become familiar with Ubuntu desktop so no plans for any shake up there.
Can neither confirm nor deny but on the surface it does appear like that from some of the postings on the CentOS mailing list.
There is an alternate called Scientific Linux (based of RHEL src rpms). For package updates see "End support" column at this link http://www.scientificlinux.org/distributions
-- Arun Khan
-
Arun Khan -
jtd -
Kenneth Gonsalves -
Kshitiz -
pavithran s -
Raj Mathur (राज माथुर) -
Rajeev R. K. -
Rony