Which distro do you use?

sigsegv · 04-08-2005, 04:20 PM

We use RHEL, but not because it's technologically any better than anything else (legality and blame go a long way in big corporate shops).

If I had my say, we'd run the BSDs, because they are technologically superior, both in design and function.

/me puts on the asbestos underpants

More often than not the distro choice is either political or made by hapless wieners who haven't a clue about what a headache managing 500 RHEL servers is going to be (though if your admins are decent, they'll have it all scripted in a few days

)

_KDF · 04-18-2005, 04:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Does
OK, I know this could start a flame between all the different distro's out there, but I was wondering which distro people use within an enterprise as a server and also why you have chosen that particular distro.

Have you installed X as well?
Have you recompiled the kernel or just used the default that came with the distro?
What is the purpose of the server? Database, Webserver, Filestorage etc.

Personally I have used Redhat 7.3, even though 9 was out already, with a recompiled kernel, no x.
This configuration was used for all sort of services, DNS, DHCP, Mail, Proxy Cache and webserver. BTW every services ran on a different machine.
This configuration was already setup when I came to the company so I didn't really have any saying in why.

Thanks for replying
Peter

Im currently running RHEL3, I will be moving to RHEL4 shortly though.

I have X installed on it for when im feeling lazy

Its currently running a standard kernel, although I have re-compiled it in the past for performance reasons.
Webserver running PHP/Mysql combination.

crypix · 04-20-2005, 09:17 AM

ah.. Redhat Enterprise AS 4 through Red Hat 8..
For personal use I have always used Fedora or Redhat because that is what I administor and I am use to. When
I do consulting and people want a base sendmail server or dns server I use FreeBSD.

allend · 04-20-2005, 10:34 AM

I have three boxes running Slackware that are firewall/gateways to the company LAN for NAT attached boxes (Win3.1, Win98, WinNT, WinXP, DOS6.0) connected to always on production machines. Our simple requirements for file and print sharing are met by Samba and CUPS, which I often administer by using X.

Oh, I forgot the HP-UX6.0 box that uses cu and UUCP over a 9600 baud serial line.

Ah, the joys of virus susceptible and legacy equipment :-).

Why Slack? It is what I started with at home and have never found a need to change. The only time I have problems is when I play.

Brian Knoblauch · 04-21-2005, 07:39 AM

We're using SuSE for our Linux boxes (which is a very small percentage of our total). Have tried Red Hat a couple times, but didn't like it and actually migrated some of that functionality to Cisco and others to Windows! (Yeah, I know :-) ) Played with some other distros, but they never made it in production at any point.