Quote:
|
whats the difference between debian amd64 and debian custom for servers
|
If I knew what "Debian custom for servers" even was, I'm pretty sure I could comment that your question is like asking while clothes shopping "Whats the difference between blue and size 14".
Those are each specific choices for independent aspects of the overall selection.
AMD64 is the 64-bit architecture of the current commonly used Intel and AMD CPUs. Those same CPUs also support a 32-bit architecture, but there is little if any reason to select 32-bit architecture for your OS for a CPU that supports AMD64.
It used to be common to compile a Linux kernel differently for server use than for desktop use. Major distributions often had pre compiled kernels optimized for server and distinct from ordinary kernels optimized to desktop. At best, the kernel build options that differed between those were only speculatively related to differences in the actual work loads of servers vs. desktop systems. Then multi-core and faster CPUs and larger L2 caches and a variety of other hardware improvements made most of that kernel build-time tuning obsolete anyway.
A Linux "server" for some specific purpose would likely have very different choices for which packages are installed than a desktop system. So you could say that a "server" install of Linux is very different from a desktop install. But a "server" for some other purpose might have a selection of packages as different from the first server as either is from the desktop system.
The installer for Centos makes a lot of default choices and presents user options all in a way that is convenient for installing a server and inconvenient for a desktop. Most installers (Debian, Ubuntu, etc.) are the opposite and have defaults and presentation that make more sense for desktop than for server. Following that example, the biggest difference between a "server" distribution and a desktop distribution ought to be in the installer (rather than in the software available to be installed).
