Following is not exactly a newbie problem but I think it is appropriate here.
I am running a FC25 sever installation in the office, basically as a LAMP sever. It is running without any problem for the last one year. The machine is an entry level server with intel xenon processor. The issue I am facing is that after boot up, there is no display. ( not even the ttys) The monitor is blank. During boot up it do through out an error message momentorily. The LAMP server is running without any problem and can be accessed through the web browser.
is there an easy way to repair / recover it without loosing the data and mysql database.
(The only viable option I could found is to boot using a USB, copy the data and re-install, which is a cumbersome process)

Regards,

Raju

Given that you are 2 versions behind the current version (Fedora 27 Server), I think the best option would be to just upgrade your server instead of trying to fix your current OS.

https://getfedora.org/en/server/download/

Since the server is up and running, and given the fact that it **IS** a server, what's the problem? If it's doing its job, you've got nothing to worry about. Access it via SSH/SCP and copy your data and files off. Connect to the MySQL database remotely, and use the mysqldump command to get a copy of your database. You should already be doing backups on a daily basis (RIGHT?), so this wouldn't be any different.

And for a server, using Fedora isn't a good idea. It is the fast-development system, and is outdated VERY quickly. A back-office server needs to be something like CentOS or Ubuntu LTS, which has a life span of many years.

1 members found this post helpful.

Yes the server is running perfectly. but since it is running inside the office, no ftp server running on it for remote access. I was doing the periodical changes in the html pages and php scripts on the machine itself. So I need access for this purpose.

Regarding the opinion that fedora is not suitable for servers, I do not agree with it. My previous sever was FC 10, which was in operation for nearly 8 years without any problem, till it was upgraded now with this new machine. Prior to that it was red hat . So in my opinion, fedora can be perfectly usable as a server, provided, you shall left it alone , if it runs smoothly.
Note:- this is a small server with 25-30 users max.

that was not recommended.
ssh/scp are part of the openssh package.
i can't believe that that wouldn't be installed on a server.
and what you describe is a very good example for why it should be activated, too (that is, the sshd daemon), even if you have direct access.

All the client machines are windows ones. So I thought SSH/SCP is not possible. however I today googled and found winscp. It is usable, still direct access is the best.

rajuvk,

I'm not trying to speak out of turn and I mean no offence to anyone, but whatever distro you wish to use for your server is really up to you.

I think in all fairness to TB0ne, he was only trying to think of the best interests for your situation. I wouldn't take it as him trying to be rude or anything else. In hindsight, I probably should have given your question more thought myself and suggested the same, being that CentOS would be a good choice for your situation, but I wasn't thinking as much as I should have at the time. Once again, we are not here to dictate which distro you use, it's once again entirely up to yourself.

I should also point out that TB0ne does have a lot of experience with IT in general and to me personally it shows, I don't know him personally (nor anyone else here), but he's only trying to help. I would not take it personally.

If your happy with Fedora, then I would suggest once again, you update to the latest version of it. But at the same time, I would consider what TB0ne has said as well. I use CentOS myself and it's a very stable system - which is why I'm using it.

Best of luck with whatever you decide.

Very sorry if I found to be rude in my previous messages. That was not so. In fact my association with linux was started in 1998-99 and have tried most of the distos including centOS at one time or other. I was running at least one machine with linux, all these years, mainly the one I keep as office server. in the hay days, our set up had an LTSP server with 5-10 nodes, a LAMP server, and a few desktops with ubuntu. Since my profession is not computers / IT, I did not attempted to acquire in depth knowledge of linux, particularly the terminal and commands part. Whenever I face issues, I googled and found solutions. I found the fedora ( old red hat) community had the best answers, so I stayed with it. In fact I never had to ask questions, that is why although I am a member of this forum since 2007, there are only 16 posts.

All these years I was constantly read messages like so and so distro is stable and some others like fedora are not suitable for servers or serious works etc. So I stated my experience that old redhat and previous FC10 was good experience for me and gave no troubles. So I continued my new server with F25. The reason may be that once installed, the system remain unattended for most part and also that it was not part of the internet.
That's all friends and again sorry for if any body felt offended.

Regards,
Raju

As a happy Fedora user, I too find the horror stories of Fedora strange - however ... this I find worrying.Any public facing server has to be updated - the number of vulnerabilities exposed these days is astonishing.

1 members found this post helpful.

...which is why you can use SSH/SCP **AND** SSHFS to connect to the system, edit files, mount drives, etc. You don't need to sit at a console.
Agree or not, it's the truth. A server needs to be up to date; Fedora and other such distros go end-of-life VERY quickly. And when you want to implement some new database/PHP/whatever feature, guess what? It's not supported on your old installation. And you can't install it easily, if at all. And all that aside, your 'server' is going to be insecure. Doesn't matter if is 30 users or 3,000 users...it needs to be secure and stable.
Servers are NOT MEANT for 'direct access'...that's why they're servers, sit in back rooms, and people connect to them over networks. Most real servers I have worked with don't even have SCREENS/keyboards/mice attached to them, except in serious emergency situations.
No offense was taken at all, but what you just wrote makes no sense at all. You say you've been working with Linux for a long time, and you've heard/been told *NOT* to use Fedora and other short-term distros as servers, by people who DO work in IT/administration for a living....yet you chose to ignore all this and do as you wish, and still argue that it's a good thing?

I've read many legal documents, and have some small experience in such things....but don't argue with my lawyers if they tell me something is bad. So if you don't work in IT as a profession, why on earth do you ignore the advice of people who DO?