OT: Anyone have experience in building a “Hackintosh”, please PM me.

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=ucodegen]To avoid the bleeding/breaking, I tend to be about 1 rev behind the current… and can pick up ‘updates’ to fix the one installed. That is why I am running FC10 though FC11 is out.[/quote]

I used to do that too until I realized they swiftly cut off support/updates to old Cores after only a year or so. This is the ‘bitten in the ass’ to which I referred. So if you plan on using your machine for more than a year, I wouldn’t recommend Fedora Core unless you’re cool with doing a full system update every year (which isn’t always possible in some environments where downtime is a no-no).[/quote]

You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.

http://www.centos.org/

[afx114]

[quote=dbapig]You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.[/quote]

Yep, we went to CentOS after Fedora dropped support/updates on a few of our FC web boxes. CentOS has been great so far. The only bummer is they go the opposite direction — a bit too conservative. For example, they ship/update to PHP 5.1, even though 5.2 has been out since 2006! I had to use a 3rd party repo to get it up to 5.2. So it’s a trade-off in each direction.

[afx114]

[quote=dbapig]You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.[/quote]

Yep, we went to CentOS after Fedora dropped support/updates on a few of our FC web boxes. CentOS has been great so far. The only bummer is they go the opposite direction — a bit too conservative. For example, they ship/update to PHP 5.1, even though 5.2 has been out since 2006! I had to use a 3rd party repo to get it up to 5.2. So it’s a trade-off in each direction.

[afx114]

[quote=dbapig]You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.[/quote]

Yep, we went to CentOS after Fedora dropped support/updates on a few of our FC web boxes. CentOS has been great so far. The only bummer is they go the opposite direction — a bit too conservative. For example, they ship/update to PHP 5.1, even though 5.2 has been out since 2006! I had to use a 3rd party repo to get it up to 5.2. So it’s a trade-off in each direction.

[afx114]

[quote=dbapig]You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.[/quote]

Yep, we went to CentOS after Fedora dropped support/updates on a few of our FC web boxes. CentOS has been great so far. The only bummer is they go the opposite direction — a bit too conservative. For example, they ship/update to PHP 5.1, even though 5.2 has been out since 2006! I had to use a 3rd party repo to get it up to 5.2. So it’s a trade-off in each direction.

[afx114]

[quote=dbapig]You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.[/quote]

Yep, we went to CentOS after Fedora dropped support/updates on a few of our FC web boxes. CentOS has been great so far. The only bummer is they go the opposite direction — a bit too conservative. For example, they ship/update to PHP 5.1, even though 5.2 has been out since 2006! I had to use a 3rd party repo to get it up to 5.2. So it’s a trade-off in each direction.

[BGinRB]

[quote=afx114][quote=dbapig]You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.[/quote]

Yep, we went to CentOS after Fedora dropped support/updates on a few of our FC web boxes. CentOS has been great so far. The only bummer is they go the opposite direction — a bit too conservative. For example, they ship/update to PHP 5.1, even though 5.2 has been out since 2006! I had to use a 3rd party repo to get it up to 5.2. So it’s a trade-off in each direction.[/quote]

I second CentOS as a production environment. And recommend PHP 5.3. If namespaces, late static binding and and closures are not convincing enough the introduction of labels will seal the deal.

[BGinRB]

[quote=afx114][quote=dbapig]You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.[/quote]

Yep, we went to CentOS after Fedora dropped support/updates on a few of our FC web boxes. CentOS has been great so far. The only bummer is they go the opposite direction — a bit too conservative. For example, they ship/update to PHP 5.1, even though 5.2 has been out since 2006! I had to use a 3rd party repo to get it up to 5.2. So it’s a trade-off in each direction.[/quote]

I second CentOS as a production environment. And recommend PHP 5.3. If namespaces, late static binding and and closures are not convincing enough the introduction of labels will seal the deal.

[BGinRB]

[quote=afx114][quote=dbapig]You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.[/quote]

Yep, we went to CentOS after Fedora dropped support/updates on a few of our FC web boxes. CentOS has been great so far. The only bummer is they go the opposite direction — a bit too conservative. For example, they ship/update to PHP 5.1, even though 5.2 has been out since 2006! I had to use a 3rd party repo to get it up to 5.2. So it’s a trade-off in each direction.[/quote]

I second CentOS as a production environment. And recommend PHP 5.3. If namespaces, late static binding and and closures are not convincing enough the introduction of labels will seal the deal.

[BGinRB]

[quote=afx114][quote=dbapig]You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.[/quote]

Yep, we went to CentOS after Fedora dropped support/updates on a few of our FC web boxes. CentOS has been great so far. The only bummer is they go the opposite direction — a bit too conservative. For example, they ship/update to PHP 5.1, even though 5.2 has been out since 2006! I had to use a 3rd party repo to get it up to 5.2. So it’s a trade-off in each direction.[/quote]

I second CentOS as a production environment. And recommend PHP 5.3. If namespaces, late static binding and and closures are not convincing enough the introduction of labels will seal the deal.

[BGinRB]

[quote=afx114][quote=dbapig]You should look into CentOS. Not as bleeding edge as FC but pretty good. It’s basically free version of Red Hat Enterprise.[/quote]

Yep, we went to CentOS after Fedora dropped support/updates on a few of our FC web boxes. CentOS has been great so far. The only bummer is they go the opposite direction — a bit too conservative. For example, they ship/update to PHP 5.1, even though 5.2 has been out since 2006! I had to use a 3rd party repo to get it up to 5.2. So it’s a trade-off in each direction.[/quote]

I second CentOS as a production environment. And recommend PHP 5.3. If namespaces, late static binding and and closures are not convincing enough the introduction of labels will seal the deal.

[LAAFTERHOURS]

http://forums.slickdeals.net/showthread.php?threadid=1506699

Talk about right timing – build your own hackintosh for under 200.

[LAAFTERHOURS]

http://forums.slickdeals.net/showthread.php?threadid=1506699

Talk about right timing – build your own hackintosh for under 200.

[LAAFTERHOURS]

http://forums.slickdeals.net/showthread.php?threadid=1506699

Talk about right timing – build your own hackintosh for under 200.

[LAAFTERHOURS]

http://forums.slickdeals.net/showthread.php?threadid=1506699

Talk about right timing – build your own hackintosh for under 200.

[Author]

Posts