Server Distribution of the Year
The best Linux distribution to install on a server.
--jeremy |
Is there any other?
Quote:
;) |
CentOS!
|
Quote:
|
Centos
|
RHEL.
|
Debian or ClarkConnect is really good as well.
|
Debian is still the server distribution for me.
|
We use Ubuntu at work. It's pretty OK.
But I find I have to do less configuration to make things do what I want them to on OpenBSD than on Ubuntu (just because the Debian people like to futz with things so much... why can't Tomcat 5.5 servlets make socket connections by default? If Tomcat is compromised, sockets are probably one of the lesser of your concerns.) |
Rhel is uncomparable
|
Voted for CentOS. Going to be giving Lenny a try. We'll See where I am at next year.
|
I wont vote but I love Debain always
its always the best :) |
Quote:
|
Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
|
Debian
|
For myself, i vote for Ubuntu LTS...
But, i also vote for RHEL / CentOS |
I'd rather have Solaris on a server but of the options here it has to be Centos
|
slackware rules!!
|
CentoS
|
I'm using Ubuntu Server 8.10, so I voted for Ubuntu LTS (no 8.10 available in the poll).
|
Quote:
|
Slackware
|
Debian All the way, Then Freebsd, then slackware.
|
Most of our servers run Debian stable, currently Etch. It is solid, but there are some very old packages! Dansguardian on Etch is a release from 2005! That's 4 years! Too old. I've started upgrading some servers to Lenny.
This year, I'm going to check out some distro's for our servers. I want new packages, probably compiled. So far, I'm thinking slackware/gentoo vs freebsd/openbsd. I love openbsd, but would prefer to stick with native linux, and not the compatibility modes of BSD. |
Disappointing to not see Fedora on the list...
|
Debian/Ubuntu
|
CentOS!
|
I prefer Fedora over RHEL, even though it may be a bit unstable.
|
We have a few RHEL servers at work and I've become quite partial to them.
|
Slackware.
Greetings to all,
Slackware is the Linux distribution I would use for a server. A second option would be Centos. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
The best server distro,,
is Slackware of course.
|
Why do you even need RHEL? when you have CentOS..
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
RHEL and Debian
Quote:
Originally Posted by b2bwild View Post Why do you even need RHEL? when you have CentOS.. Quote:
CentOS certainly provides a less expensive alternative, but if that is the case, I'd just as soon use Debian. At work, on our official supported servers we widely deploy Red Hat Enterprise Linux. On some SQA departmental systems where we maintain them ourselves, we have also experimented with Debian servers with very good results. At home, I use Debian based systems for the majority of my work, whether desktops or servers, but I test all different systems in the Linux and BSD circles. Here, I'd take a Debian based system any day, but I frequently use Debian derived systems, not just plain Debian systems. |
Quote:
-C |
It depends on my needs. Generally CentOS but Slackware is very good on some special occasions.
|
It has to be slackware centos had RHE are good but it slackware
|
Quote:
IMHO, a Server solution should come with support. So something like Ubuntu Server (supported by Canonical), Red Hat Enterprise Linux (supported by Red Hat), or SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (Supported By Novell). CentOS is good for a development server (same goes with OpenSUSE), but other than than...I wouldn't recommend running your "bread and butter" on Slackware... Sorry Slackers! But I have to agree with the guy who signs my checks! ;) -C |
CentOS. I've had to pay th $1500 per server for support of RHEL and we finally dropped it and switched to CentOS. RH support was bad, very bad. Sure not worth paying for. But some management in the front office felt better if they had a company behind it. But this year instead of paying out over 100k we switched to CentOS. No issues at all. Wish I had got part of the cash that we saved them .... but it sure did not work out that way. :D
What can Slackware do that CentOS can't ....or better worded, why Slackware over CentOS? I've never run that OS and am curious. I do not want to start a flame war over it. TIA. |
I've actually seen quite a few Ubuntu servers popping up out in the cosmos, and have been wondering why people are choosing it in lieu of Debian. Would one such person have some words of inspiration?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Yes, You have a point there: I too would leave a commercial server "behind me",... but, I do work in a firm with a one single central server acting as a gateway for internet and LAN - it's on Slackware Since 2005. It will stay Slackware as long as 1+1 equals 2 "Just works" on every day tasks "Just works" on minor updates "Just works" on major updates "Just works" on hardware up-scaling "Just works" on dirty hacks for new services and protocols (as the running software is nearly vanilla and patches cleanly) And just keeps me "needed" and "unreplaceable" to a reasonable extent (I really don't ever push my luck) How (and what) do You compare to that? So it's Slackware. And here on LQ, I allways get <48h -> solution anyway :8-) where were we? |
Quote:
I once worked at a shop where the _ALL_ of the RH linux boxes were hacked. Manwhile, _ALL_ of my FreeBSD boxes were impermeable to the same 'sploit. Commercial support does NOT give you better support. Only somewhere else to point the finger when things go bad. Those who believe otherwise are only deluding themselves. |
Quote:
Those servers probably got hacked because of poor system administration. It's been my experience that, not matter what system you are running (including Microsoft Servers); the system is only as secure as how you set it up. It's foolish to think that one OS is more secure than another. -C |
Quote:
Some OS's _ARE_ most assuredly more secure than others, e.g. OpenBSD because they build it with security first and foremost in mind. Other OS's are based upon other priorities such as convenience first in mind, e.g. Windoze. Or if those examples don't float your boat substitute SELinux, TrustedBSD, etc. for default Mandrake, or whatever... The important thing to remember is to choose the proper tool for the task at hand. There is no SAK and one size does not fit all. fwiw, the RH incident I referenced was circa 96-97 and the RH admins definitely knew their stuff. No doubt Linux has come a long way since then but I could still cite several more RH horror stories at a couple Fortune 500 companies. Yeah, the shit did roll downhill and that's the value add that RH offers. That said, RH would be the LAST distro I'd use but your mileage may vary and this is the stuff of holy wars. |
Quote:
We are running RHEL (Along with Sun Solaris) on our most critical servers; and the rest are a mix of CentOS/Opensolaris for development. We running Exchange and Active Directory; and we also have some MAC Servers in there too. No Problems (**KNOCKS ON WOOD**). I'm sorry but security is how you implement it; it's not in the OS. Quote:
-C |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:41 PM. |