I have to agree. Ubuntu is a fine end-user distribution, but RHEL is a
much more capable Server Distribution.

Please try to remember that the reason that different distributions exist
is to cater to specific needs. Just because a specific Desktop distro can
act as a Server doesn't mean that it is anywhere near optimal for server
tasks, and vice versa.

Believe me, you DON'T want to use RHEL as a desktop distro simply because
it is tweaked not to give X high priority. Many times the mouse will move
in a choppy manner because a server process is operating at that moment.
Most users would have a fit if their mouse movements and GUI clicks were
delayed by that much. Similarly, X uses too many CPU cycles to be used at
user priority on a dedicated server.

Kendall

> Jay wrote:
>>>BTW, anyone here have used FB (1.5 or 2.0) on RedHat Ent. 5?
>>
>> If it helps, I'd recommend Ubuntu over Redhat. I've been running my
>> website on Ubuntu 6.06 LTS with Firebird 2.0 CS. I haven't had 1
>> single problem since upgrading to Firebird 2.0.
>
> Just because Ubuntu runs fine for you doesn't mean that RedHat is no
> good. RHEL is excellent platform for servers, if you can afford it. If
> you can't, CentOS is also a good choice.
>
>
> --
> Milan Babuskov
> http://fbexport.sourceforge.net
>
>