|
#1
June 10th, 2007, 06:25 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| Fedora Has anyone tried Red Hat's Fedora OS?
__________________ Intel Mac Mini 1.83 1GB 10.5.5 PowerMac G4 833Hz 768MB 10.3.9 Trying is the first step to failure. Homer Simpson  |
|
#2
June 10th, 2007, 11:35 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| years ago, yes.
__________________ macnews.net.tc is active again. MacBook Air 13" 1.6 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 80 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.5.5 Hackintosh Core2Duo 2.4 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 160 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.5.5 iPhone 3G 16 GB white, AppleTV 1G 40 GB Mac user since 1987, Apple Product Professional 2007, 2008. Apple Certified Support Professional 10.5 |
|
#3
June 10th, 2007, 11:54 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
__________________ Intel Mac Mini 1.83 1GB 10.5.5 PowerMac G4 833Hz 768MB 10.3.9 Trying is the first step to failure. Homer Simpson |
|
#4
June 10th, 2007, 12:50 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Generally, Fedora is a distro that tries to incorporate the newest and greatest at the _cost_ of some stability. On the other hand, new doesn't _necessarily_ have to mean less stable. Are you looking for something specific in opinions?
__________________ macnews.net.tc is active again. MacBook Air 13" 1.6 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 80 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.5.5 Hackintosh Core2Duo 2.4 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 160 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.5.5 iPhone 3G 16 GB white, AppleTV 1G 40 GB Mac user since 1987, Apple Product Professional 2007, 2008. Apple Certified Support Professional 10.5 |
|
#5
June 10th, 2007, 01:31 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Incidentally, Fedora 7 was released a few weeks ago. I'm more of a Debian/Slackware/Ubuntu fan, but I might check this out for the heck of it. 
__________________ • Apple iMac G5 17" (2 GHz G5) - Mac OS X 10.4.11 • Apple Macintosh Quadra 650 (33 MHz MC68040) - Mac OS 8.1 • Apple PowerBook Duo 230 (33 MHz MC68030) - System 7.1 • "JHVH-1" (2 GHz AMD Athlon XP 2400+) - Slackware 12.1 • "Kidbuntu" (2.8 GHz Celeron D 335) - Ubuntu 8.04 |
|
#6
June 10th, 2007, 03:19 PM
| |||
| |||
| I'm a Debian fan. I've Tested Fedora up until version 4. My biggest gripe was with the "yum" package manager, the way it seemed to hang the computer whenever it queried packages, and the insane amount of network access it required just to operate. Apparently things have changed a lot in Core 7, like improvements to the boot up time, and also to yum. However, I have yet to give it a go, since I'm nice and cosy with Ubuntu. Why fix something that ain't broken? |
|
#7
June 10th, 2007, 03:24 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| "Why fix something that ain't broken?" - is an often quoted question. Of course there _are_ reasons that would justify to "fix" it. For example, if another system offers features that are just not available for the one you're using. That, of course, is not really the case here, I'd say. I'm still interested, rhisiart: Do you have more specific questions?
__________________ macnews.net.tc is active again. MacBook Air 13" 1.6 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 80 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.5.5 Hackintosh Core2Duo 2.4 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 160 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.5.5 iPhone 3G 16 GB white, AppleTV 1G 40 GB Mac user since 1987, Apple Product Professional 2007, 2008. Apple Certified Support Professional 10.5 |
|
#8
June 10th, 2007, 04:00 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| I used to be a RedHat when it was free. Then I went with Fedora, but with the advent of CentOS, I have put away with Fedora because of it's aggressive release schedule. I use CentOS on almost all servers I manage, and I have been happy with it. I highly recommend it. If you don't have the ability to go CentOS, Fedora would be my second solution. |
 |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:21 PM.
