LinuxQuestions.org
LinuxAnswers - the LQ Linux tutorial section.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Debian
User Name
Password
Debian This forum is for the discussion of Debian Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 06-17-2007, 05:26 PM   #1
Akhran
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Distribution: Debian 'lenny'
Posts: 208

Rep: Reputation: 30
Is Debian 'lenny' aka 'testing' suitable for production environment?


I've been using 'testing' branch for production servers for quite awhile. However, recently I noticed packages are disappearing from the 'testing' branch. Eg. Heartbeat-2. Heartbeat-2 was found in 'testing' branch until a few weeks back.

Will this trend continue and what if I do a 'aptitude update;aptitude upgrade;aptitude dist-upgrade'? Will it uninstall the heatbeat-2 package that is currently installed on my servers?

Thanks !
 
Old 06-17-2007, 05:28 PM   #2
vtel57
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 858

Rep: Reputation: 88
Debian is so rock solid that their testing versions are usually more stable that some other distros' release versions. However, for anything really, really important, I would stick with Etch.

Luck!
 
Old 06-17-2007, 05:52 PM   #3
Junior Hacker
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: North America
Distribution: Debian testing Mandriva Ubuntu
Posts: 2,687

Rep: Reputation: 59
It is possible the heartbeat package has been migrated into another package, or like Debian likes to do, change the name "Firefox" to "Iceweasel", might have to do a little research to figure out what happen to it. And as stated above, Debian testing is "Rock solid".
 
Old 06-17-2007, 06:00 PM   #4
ErrorBound
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Posts: 280

Rep: Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior Hacker
And as stated above, Debian testing is "Rock solid".
Usually. The day a major change happens (i.e. xfree86 -> xorg), testing can become a bit of a gong show. It's a surprise I wouldn't want in a production environment, and would probably stick to etch.
 
Old 06-17-2007, 06:21 PM   #5
Junior Hacker
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: North America
Distribution: Debian testing Mandriva Ubuntu
Posts: 2,687

Rep: Reputation: 59
Been using testing for quite some time, never seen any gong shows here, just stable performance. And I work my Debians to the bits, they handle the loads my Red Hat derivatives choke and freeze on.
EDIT: Based on your example of the transition from Xfree86 to X11, you must have done a distribution upgrade, not testing upgrade.

Last edited by Junior Hacker; 06-17-2007 at 06:38 PM.
 
Old 06-17-2007, 08:29 PM   #6
farslayer
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: Willoughby, Ohio
Distribution: linuxdebian
Posts: 7,231
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 189Reputation: 189
NO. For a production server use Stable.

Using testing or unstable in a production environment is kinda silly if you ask me. For a desktop or non-critical things Testing or unstable is fine, they are more stable that the names imply, but for a production server I wouldn't even consider it.
 
Old 06-17-2007, 09:02 PM   #7
Telemachos
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 754

Rep: Reputation: 59
I suppose it depends on what kinds of things you're doing and what sort of system you have. Right at the moment a lot of new packages are flowing quickly into testing and there has been a lot of breakage on desktop systems (problems from xorg, nvidia, ati, etc.). The reputation of "Debian testing as most distros stable" can be misleading. I think it comes from Etch (old testing) being so incredibly solid as it took its time to become new stable, but a newer testing Debian may be rocky again. For a production server I would stick with Etch.
 
Old 06-18-2007, 04:02 AM   #8
Akhran
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Distribution: Debian 'lenny'
Posts: 208

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Checking heartbeat
trying to update heartbeat from 1.2.5-3 to 2.0.8-9 (candidate is 16 days old)
heartbeat is waiting for curl, net-snmp
Updating curl makes 169 depending packages uninstallable on i386
Updating curl makes 111 non-depending packages uninstallable on i386

More details here.

Are such problems common for packages in testing branch?

Thanks.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior Hacker
It is possible the heartbeat package has been migrated into another package, or like Debian likes to do, change the name "Firefox" to "Iceweasel", might have to do a little research to figure out what happen to it. And as stated above, Debian testing is "Rock solid".
 
Old 06-18-2007, 03:00 PM   #9
Junior Hacker
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: North America
Distribution: Debian testing Mandriva Ubuntu
Posts: 2,687

Rep: Reputation: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akhran
Are such problems common for packages in testing branch?
Yes, Even for a distribution like Fedora, where one team puts out an update to the kernel for example, another team like livna has to put together a new kmod-nvidia package matching that new kernel, sometimes the second team may be a little busy and their package is slightly delayed. The first team will carry on posting the updated kernel because they also are busy and have a long list of things to do and need to show a certain amount of completion on a timely basis.
A stable version distribution does not upgrade packages, only bug fixes and security fixes that usually does not have different teams involved.
 
Old 06-19-2007, 03:57 AM   #10
ErrorBound
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Posts: 280

Rep: Reputation: 31
Another little "surprise" will be coming up soon, when the 2.6.21 kernel gets into lenny. If you have any /dev/hd*s, they will become /dev/sd*s, so you should make a mental note of this and remember it when your system won't boot after a dist-upgrade!

Of course you can avoid this by using labels, or better yet stick to etch for a production environment. That's what it's there for, after all.
 
Old 06-19-2007, 04:07 AM   #11
nx5000
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Out
Posts: 3,307

Rep: Reputation: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior Hacker
Yes, Even for a distribution like Fedora
Exactly what happened a few days ago on FC7.

They forgot a dependency and the kernel could not be updated. It was solved the day after.

I wouldn't use a testing branch for production. If you really need some packages from testing, either backport them yourself or find somebody who has done it.
 
Old 06-19-2007, 01:10 PM   #12
vtel57
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 858

Rep: Reputation: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErrorBound
Another little "surprise" will be coming up soon, when the 2.6.21 kernel gets into lenny. If you have any /dev/hd*s, they will become /dev/sd*s, so you should make a mental note of this and remember it when your system won't boot after a dist-upgrade!

Of course you can avoid this by using labels, or better yet stick to etch for a production environment. That's what it's there for, after all.
Don't forget that the libATA drivers that force the kernel to see every device as a SCSI device (sd*) also will force the SCSI 15 partition limit on all hard disks. I recently had this problem in Zenwalk. I have 18 partitions on one of my drives. hda18 is my distro-common storage partition. hda17 is my /swap on that drive. Zenwalk couldn't see either. I had to custom compile a kernel with IDE support to eliminate this problem.

The libATA driver system being instituted in newer kernels has its advantages, but for folks like me, who use large drives with more than 15 partitions, it SUCKS!
 
Old 06-19-2007, 02:35 PM   #13
Junior Hacker
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: North America
Distribution: Debian testing Mandriva Ubuntu
Posts: 2,687

Rep: Reputation: 59
I use bootitng, my shared data partition is allocated high on the drive, I can create 253 primary partitions in front of it on my SCSI SATA drive and the kernels of the Linux systems don't see most of them, currently my data partition is the 20th primary partition. When I type: fdisk -l, the only partitions that show up are the three I allow that system to see, which is it's root, shared swap, and the shared data. So the SCSI SATA nameing convention does not affect my multi-boot on a large drive.

Last edited by Junior Hacker; 06-19-2007 at 02:44 PM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Last week Debian Testing is still ETCH or lenny already?? doraimom Debian 1 04-09-2007 06:01 AM
Hoary preview wise to use in production environment? leemoreau Ubuntu 1 03-28-2005 11:45 AM
VMWare 5 beta in production environment? jiml8 Linux - Software 3 02-26-2005 02:29 PM
Fedora In Production Environment treedstang Fedora 3 06-10-2004 01:10 PM
POLL: What do you use OpenBSD for in a production environment? mylesridgely *BSD 1 10-17-2003 03:56 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration