On 4/1/2010 1:35 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> I thought 4 was too buggy compared to 3 and held off
>>>> upgrading most machines until 5 was out. In retrospect that
>>>> still seems like it was a good move even if most of the
>>>> problems in 4 were eventually fixed in updates. But with
>>>> many years elapsing between releases, skipping a version like
>>>> that may not be possible again.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Les Mikesell
>>>
>>> Les,
>>>
>>> what was buggy for you?
>>>
>>> internet facing or just internal servers?
>>>
>>> centos and the centos team have been rock solid for us in dealing with
>>> CentOS 4 on our servers.
>>
>> I can't remember the exact details. Some of it had to do with mod_perl
>> and the assortment of other perl modules needed for RT, Twiki, and some
>
> *I* ended up using the standalone HTTP server for RT and populated the
> missing perl mods from rpmforge.
I did have it all working for a while on some machines but it seemed
like something would break every time I updated anything.
>> other applications. And maybe the mysql version was wrong for something
>
> CentOSPlus is needed for a *proper* version of mysql AND PHP for Joomla!
> and WordPress.
>
>> I wanted to run. A lot of the things weren't technically broken, just
>> not particularly good version choices for their time. I may have had
>> some driver problems with a Dell raid controller or firewire too, but I
>
> CentOSPlus has the firewire drivers...
I used that too, but eventually replaced my external firewire drives
with hot-swap SATA bays. But overall, I could not see anything at all
that was better in 4.x than 5.x, so I migrated as much as I could
directly from 3 to 5 and replaced the few 4.x's that I had installed as
quickly as possible - and it still seems like the right thing to have
done. I still have a few 3.x's lingering on, mostly because they never
break and they have some odd application setups that I'm hoping won't be
needed much longer so I won't have to re-create them.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com