Linux - DistributionsThis forum is for Distribution specific questions.
Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, Novell, LFS, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora - the list goes on and on...
Note: An (*) indicates there is no official participation from that distribution here at LQ.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
I have successfully installed SuSE 9.1 in two of my computers. One of them acts as a server with Apache/PHP/MySQL and ProFTPd. No X is installed in this one, just a simple system as all servers should be. The other is my main system. Both are behind a firewall and are sharing files with NFS without a problem.
I'm really happy with SuSE 9.1 Pro as server. Would there be any advantage of using SuSE Enterprise Server 9 instead?. I've searched SuSE's page and not only the configuration tools and installation, but also the packages, seems to be identical for both SuSE Linux Enterprise 9 and SuSE Linux 9.1 Pro.
Does anybody have any experiences with any/both?
Thanks in advance!
Last edited by Mega Man X; 09-03-2004 at 01:48 PM.
I submitted my request in the beginning of July (5th or 6th) and got it at the end of August (21st or 20th). Under the waiting time, I've got like three e-mails from Novell, saying either that it was delayed or that they ran out of copies. But it arrived.
I'm not sure when you've made your request, but it should arrive faster for you, since you are in the US. Here to Europe took some good weeks to arrive after they sent me an e-mail telling that the DVD's where shipped .
And gosh, I really know what you mean by "the waiting is killing me" ghehe. But hang in there mate!
I don't know of any real technical reason to use any distro over the other; maybe one has better network monitoring tools than the oehters. The bulk of the functionality would be in the apps you serve though (like httpd, proftpd, sshd). I would figure they should run just the same from one distro to the next.
If you're in a tinkering mood, you could always try Linux From Scratch. That will definitely take more time than a SuSE install though
Regardless, I would imagine you're completely free to test drive the different distros since this isn't a must-be-up-24/7 type of server.
Thanks for your help once again mate!. Good point, I think I will be trying out a few distributions around. I'm still about to try out gentoo and LFS sometime. I just don't feel that "power linux user" yet . Solaris (which I loved in the past) and FreeBSD(that I've tried for barely two weeks) could also be an alternative. I will start out with SuSE LES first, since I already got the images
Hehehe... I don't know if I would consider myself a power user yet. The thing that attracted me to LFS was the desire to remove the bloat of a distribution. Having an LFS system would mean only the stuff you want is installed. It's perfect for a server: lean, mean, and optimized.
But I'll admit, I've used Red Hat and SuSE for my server in the past. Shhhh! Don't tell anybody or I'll lose my geek-among-geeks status
[*J.W. glances to the left and right - the coast seems clear *]
Your secrets are safe with us. As long as we're all sharing here, I gotta admit, most of the time (meaning at work) I have no choice but to (*gasp*) use Windows. Company policy and all that. I feel dirty now.
The question remains: Suse 9.1 Pro or Enterprise Server?
I was looking over SuSE Enterprise today, and I swear it is a repackaged SuSE 9.1 Pro. I too run 9.1 Pro as a server, and I like it alot once it is stripped down a bit. I was going to install the eval, but I don't want to waste the time if it is the same as the one I have installed.
Thanks Pcghost! That's exactly what I wanted to know, and that's exactly how I feel too.
SuSE 9.1 and Server 9.0 seems too identical. I've googled and googled but nothing interesting came up.
Since I have only the images of SuSE 9.0 Server, I did not want to 1)waste good 5 disks to install SuSE and 2) go all over formating , reinstalling, patching configuring something that is doing a great job (read SuSE 9.1 Pro).
Dunno, I've tried many distributions in the past, but the more I use SuSE the more I love it. No wonder why Linus Torvalds himself uses SuSE at home (or did he?).
SuSE is THE desktop distro in my opinion. It has some competition from Fedora and Mandrake, but once the Packman YaST source is added to SuSE, there is no comparison. It is flat out superior. I didn't know that Mr. Torvalds uses SuSE at home, but I guess it makes sense.
After searching around, I too am sticking with 9.1 on my server. The only difference I could find was they lock YOU so you can't get updates on the server evaluation. I bet you could point it at a 9.1 tree and it would patch fine, but why bother.