Linux

I use Fedora KDE as my homeserver, because it is my media center too. That's the reason for the desktop.

Cons for me:

First I struggled with firewalld, it is more challenging than UFW. I removed it, because my router does the job.

Second SELinux is very annoying at the beginning. You install samba and vsftp and it will not work until you set permissions for SELinux.

SELinux is complicated for the start. Documentation is not very helpful for this imo. It works now. If you want to have an easy way, you can set it to permissive mode. I kept it running.

Pros for Fedora has actual software and I really love DNF 🥰

I run Fedora Server on a blade server in a colo.

Pros:

• Cockpit is the GOAT 🐐
• Descended from RHEL so everything is supported
• Podman is the GOAT 🐐

Cons:

• Podman is getting worse, for instance they recently deprecated systemd generate and tell you to use Quadlet, for running pods, you need to use Kubernetes. This greatly complicates my workflow.
• SELinux, while secure, and easy to troubleshoot with Cockpit, is a major pain in the ass that prevents most containers from accessing their data directories. It can be corrected but is extremely frustrating.
• Quadlet is extremely inconsistent, I can copy the working unit file for a container and it works, change the name and variables for another container, and one launches but the other won’t start. One will have the wrong name. Stupid things, like putting the name in quotes, reloading, removing the quotes fixes it. I have harsh words for the idiot who deprecated systemd generate.
• something like Tiddlywiki, their documentation will put you in /var/www but Fedora uses /usr/www or something. You get used to the Fedora things but you can end up on a goose chase sometimes.

Those cons are starting to hit hard, and when I reimage this server next I’m probably going to Proxmox or Debian. Server 37 was good but I probably won’t bother with 39.

Isn't Fedora's support window a bit over a year per release? Would you want to deal with upgrades every year?

Selinux policy's. Its weakness, also its strenght.

I've been utilizing Fedora as my go-to server operating system for over a decade, starting around Fedora 13 and consistently progressing through the subsequent major releases. Throughout this journey, Fedora has proven to be a reliable choice, offering several noteworthy advantages.

One of the standout features of Fedora, reminiscent of its desktop counterpart, is the availability of up-to-date and cutting-edge packages. With the backing of Red Hat, compatibility with a range of software, including SystemD and FirewallD, enhances its appeal for server applications.

However, it's crucial to consider Fedora's rapid release cycle, with a new version emerging approximately every six months and a 13-month support window for each release. While this frequent update schedule ensures access to the latest features, it can pose challenges for server environments where uptime is critical, and system administrators may find it demanding to keep up with the pace while managing compliance, audits, and other business processes.

Despite these considerations, my personal experience with Fedora as a server has been exceptionally positive. The OS has demonstrated robust performance across diverse environments, seamlessly adapting to various setups, from bare metal and virtual machines to containers. The flexibility extends from smaller hardware configurations like the Raspberry Pi to more substantial servers with 40+ vCPUs and 1.5TB RAM.

SELinux, a crucial component for security, seamlessly integrates with most applications, but I have encountered some challenges with WINE headless server programs, particularly for hosting Windows-based game servers not originally designed for Linux. Additionally, compatibility with Debian-based Crypto wallets proved to be a stumbling block, requiring the use of a Debian VM for compilation and subsequent transfer to Fedora.

In terms of server redundancy and monitoring, I rely on three Fedora servers equipped with essential software such as Nginx, Grafana, Prometheus, Influxdb, and fping. Wireguard and Samba facilitate automated file transfers between another set of servers, contributing to an efficient setup.

Automation plays a significant role in my server management, with Ansible and Bash scripts streamlining tasks such as package installations, configuration adjustments, and firewall rule setups. Each Fedora server is configured for self-startup to ensure uninterrupted operation in case of power failure or manual reboots.

I've successfully integrated an LSI/Intel server RAID card into one of my Fedora servers, and the third-party RPM package for monitoring (storcli64) installed seamlessly. LSI card driver support is built into the Linux kernel, contributing to a hassle-free experience.

The only notable limitation I've encountered pertains to desktop gaming, a domain where I'm exploring transitioning to Fedora. For gaming servers requiring Steam/SteamCMD and Windows DLLs, alternative solutions might be more suitable, unless willing to navigate potential challenges with WINE and SELinux adjustments.

In conclusion, the suitability of Fedora as a server hinges on your specific use case. For web or Internet of Things servers, it stands out as an excellent choice. However, if your requirements involve gaming servers with Steam dependencies, alternative options may warrant consideration. As I've explored various Linux and *BSD systems over the years, Fedora has proven its versatility, offering a compelling solution for a range of server applications.

Don't use Fedora in prod. Dixi.

We used to run firewalls running Fedora at work, works fine. Issue is you're only getting 6 months of updates, best to look at Rocky Linux for something that doesn't change much if you do anything beyond a single program.

I wouldn't. If you must use Fedora use it in a podman container on top off something more stable like debian