On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 18:19, Dipperstein, Michael wrote:
> I'd like the migration to be as painless as possible, and I'd like the
> distribution to be one that is actively updated with the latest bug fixes and
> security patches.  A free distribution is also preferred over one that can only
> be obtained by purchasing a service.

Try out WhiteBox Enterprise Linux 3.0 http://whiteboxlinux.org/

Fedora Core also looks alright to me but I've got a couple servers stuffed in
the closet at home that I don't want to upgrade often, and WhiteBox will track
the RHEL3 release cycle. My workstation is still RH9 and I'm planning on just
using Fedora Legacy for RH9 updates until Fedora Core 2 is released, at which
point I will probably switch over.

> It would be cool if the distribution used a 2.6 kernel, though it's not
> something I need.

I think there are WhiteBox/RHEL3/RH9 compatible 2.6 kernels at
http://people.redhat.com/arjanv/2.6/ , be sure to view the readme since
it's test grade. Its known not to agree with LVM, which I use, and the
improvements over the 2.4 kernels hasn't been sufficent to make me roll
my own upgrade so I don't know how hard it would be to fix the LVM issue.
I imagine it wouldn't be very hard as long as you don't mind making your
system only capable of running 2.6.

Fedora Core 2 will have 2.6 default.

-- Mike Olson

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.