which is the most used as a server is that centos or ubuntu in smal busssiness

lleb · 04-28-2013, 11:43 AM

sorry unSpawn, ill further qualify my statement about CentOS here:

there are community downstream "EL Rebuilds" that strive for 1:1 bitwise compatibility with the "core" of "Enterprise Linux" (EL).

What makes up "core" is a point of contention. Red Hat has several "base" entitlement options and 50+ "add-on" channels.

To be 1:1 bitwise compatible, you can't be using a "continuous release" (CR) that may be different. You also can't be mixing EL Rebuild components with Fedora EPEL ones where the EL Rebuild doesn't provide what Red Hat does

EPEL can be newer than RHEL and its add-ons.

Understand Red Hat has *no* stance on compatibility and *never* will. However, that doesn't stop people from throwing Red Hat "under the bus" for things it has nothing to do with.

Sorry for not being as clear as I should have in my first post on this thread.

http://www.centos.org/modules/tinyco...index.php?id=5

Quote:

CentOS Goals

Our purpose is to provide stable Linux solutions for organizations and individuals who do not need strong commercial support to achieve successful operation.

To meet that overall goal, we strive to achieve:

* easy maintenance
* self hosting distribution (one that can build on itself)
* suitability for long term use in production environments
* friendly environment for users and package maintainers
* long-term support of the core
* active development
* community infrastructure
* open management
* open business model
* commercial support - offered by partner vendors

CentOS uses the original sources whenever possible. Under normal circumstances CentOS will NOT add patches to original upstream source packages. The vast majority of changes made will be made to comply with the upstream vendor's re-distribution policies concerning trademarked names or logos. Any other changes made will be spelled out in the Release Notes for the individual CentOS product.

key words there, normal circumstances and vast majority. not 100%. do not get me wrong, im not knocking CentOS at all, it is my server of choice for a small business and for personal use, but I do not know how small the OPs business is, do you?

No indication if it is 2 people or 200 people. Both can be considered small business.

http://www.centos.org/modules/tinyco...index.php?id=3

Quote:

Purpose of CentOS

CentOS exists to provide a free enterprise class computing platform to anyone who wishes to use it. CentOS 2, 3, and 4 are built from publically available open source SRPMS provided by a prominent North American Enterprise Linux vendor. CentOS conforms fully with the upstream vendors redistribution policies and aims to be 100% binary compatible. (CentOS mainly changes packages to remove upstream vendor branding and artwork.). CentOS is designed for people who need an enterprise class OS without the cost or support of the prominent North American Enterprise Linux vendor.

Neither the CentOS Project (we who build CentOS) nor any version of CentOS is affiliated with, produced by, or supported by the prominent North American Enterprise Linux vendor. Neither does our software contain the upstream vendor's product ... although it is built from the same open source SRPMS as the upstream enterprise products.

also note that CentOS did not include 5 and 6 in this 100% binary compatibility list.

While for the most part CentOS is basically the same as RHE, it is not always. That is the point I was attempting to make.

salasi · 04-28-2013, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lleb

...and that in many cases as stated above CentOS will add Fedora repos to its platform, thus breaking the upstream from RHE.

Here is a quote from http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories

Quote:

An example of what NOT to do

WARNING: Do NOT do this.

Mixing Fedora repositories with CentOS oriented repositories: Look for 'name=Fedora', vs. 'name=CentOS.(whatever)'. Fedora repositories are not likely to be compatible with CentOS. Repositories for other Enterprise Linux distros derived from the same upstream sources are more likely to be compatible, but should still be used with care.

I don't get much encouragement for the use of fed repos from that, in any circumstances. Do they break their own rules, and do it themselves?

hyperdaz · 04-28-2013, 12:07 PM

lleb,

My first reply was for RHEL as that was the topic I quoted from you....

As I said "IF" RHEL needed to release another 5.x in the "End of Extended Life Phase" for whatever reason I would think CentOS would if demand wanted/required a release would probably do another release past the 31st March 2017.
Its a very big "IF".... (If not CentOS then someone would even if it was just a rolling repository release rather than DVD).

But if RHEL changed their support structure again then its pretty logical that CentOS would follow as they did when RHEL made the change previously....

Look forward to the many Fedora packages within CentOS release post from you

Hdaz

hyperdaz · 04-28-2013, 12:14 PM

Quote:

While for the most part CentOS is basically the same as RHE, it is not always. That is the point I was attempting to make.

I don't think anyone is disputing this.... even CentOS themselves they cant know how RHEL are doing things if RHEL don't help them....

lleb · 04-28-2013, 12:26 PM

again not trying to get in a pissing match, but CentOS 5.x and 6.x are not 100% RHE.

one example for added features to CentOS that are directly from Fedora, not RH, is the EPEL that is required for many features not provided by CentOS directly. While CentOS does not produce, nor support EPEL, here it is directly from their wiki and pointing to Fedoraproject.org.

Quote:

Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux (EPEL) - This repository (See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL) provides rebuilds of Fedora packages for EL5 and EL6. Install the appropriate epel-release package for EL5 or EL6 to configure.
This repo has made efforts not to replace system packages. In some cases it has endeavored to directly address CentOS compatibility but has expressly denied inter-repository compatibility as a goal. It may not mix well with other 3rd party repos. So, make SURE you are using the Priorities yum plugin if you are using EPEL ... especially if you mix its packages with those from other 3rd party repos. It should also be noted that, while EPEL may not overwrite distro packages, it may have conflicts with the CentOS extras repo which is enabled by default.
Mailing list for EPEL development - not really a support list, but seems to be the only option. On that list, an EPEL community member has indicated that attending to CentOS support and compatibility (to 'cater for' CentOS) was not an EPEL responsibility to him, as the CentOS usage level was not "verified with a realistic statistic". Another at EPEL recalled the history and represented a 'cooler head' with a goal to not gratuitously break CentOS with version skew.

also note my quote for termination of end of life cycle is current from CentOS FAQ, they will not be changing those dates any time soon for the exact reason I pointed out earlier. The extended life cycle provided by RH is a paid for service. The end of life cycle for all intensive purposes is currently 5.5 years. Thus CentOS 5.x will terminate in 2017 with CentOS 6.x lasting until 2020, thus a much better option for fresh install over the 5.x line.

again not trying to create a pissing fight, just pointing out some basic facts.

1. CentOS 5.x and 6.x are not 100% bitwise compatible with RHE. CentOS 2.x, 3.x, and 4.x were.

2. The current life cycle of CentOS is roughly 10 years that means CentOS 5.x will come to the end of its life cycle soon, not as soon as I had thought as I had its start date in my head os much earlier then it really was. As CentOS 5.x went live shortly after RHEL 5.x in 2007, that means CentOS 5.x will end its life support cycle in 2017, roughly 3 years from now. I had it in my head that CentOS 5.x started in 2003 or 2004, thus its end of life cycle would be much sooner then it really is.

3. CentOS is IMHO a better option then Ubuntu for a server OS due to its life cycle being much longer.

Are any of those points wrong? No they are not.

I have provided a link from CentOS directly on they are no longer 100% bit compatible with RHE since v 4.x

The support life cycle of CentOS 5.x will terminate in 2017 according to the link provided from CentOS FAQ page.

The life cycle of CentOS is far greater then that of Ubuntu, again in my opinion that makes it the better choice for a server OS. you may not like that, but it is an opinion and you are welcome to discus as to why you dont think that CentOS is a better choice then Ubuntu for a server class OS.

mediono · 05-03-2013, 02:25 AM

Centos 6

kooru · 05-03-2013, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hovhannes

hello,

which is the most used in smal bussiness as a server is that centos or ubuntu.

As already said from others, depends on what your using it for.
Anyway i vote CentOS