RH 7.3 vs RH Advanced Server 3.0 ES...worth it??

[Trekkie]

Hi,

I like an opinion on purchasing RH AS 3.0 es versus RH 7.3 as OS for Qmail email server. I find RH 7.3 very stable and robust, but I'm afraid of security holes. We're a small business but we're growing in size. Apparently, RH AS 2.1 was based on RH 7.3.

Am I overly cautious about security issue?

Thanks,

T.k.

 

[mseth]

Why purchase it, as RHEL is "old technology," to get things working on it (Oracle 9i for example) requires a LOT of work (I am currently setting it up at work, trust me). I would recommend something like Slackware. It has always done well by me and several people recommend it for "server" machines. Just a suggestion.

 

[thedaver]

I used to be a RedHat advocate. I don't like them much anymore. Debian is an excellent solution. Irrespective of what you choose, I would avoid RH7.3 as there is RH9.0 which has at least gotten more security updates then 7.3. You may also want to consider the free Fedora series.

http://www.surfinbox.com/loans/

 

[Trekkie]

Thanks guys for your input. I very much appreciate it and I will consider it before making my decision.

T.k.

 

[lgarner]

For a simple mail server, I think the server editions of Linux are probably overkill. The "Pro" versions, like RH9 or Suse 9.1 would work fine. I would definitely upgrade from 7.3, though. That's pretty old and no longer supported.

 

[ericbrunson]

I definitely agree with lgarner. There is little if no difference in the kernels of an Enterprise product and the freely downloadable versions.

I think the only reason to consider paying for the products is if you need a support contract, in which case you could very well hire someone from here and probably get more for your dollar than phone support from an engineer at RedHat.

Plus you won't end up with, "I'm sorry, that's not part of the distribution, so I can't/won't help you with it"