LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Linux - Software (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/)
-   -   Red Hat EL4 vs. SuSE ES 9 (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/red-hat-el4-vs-suse-es-9-a-342605/)

dumbsheep 07-12-2005 06:10 PM

Red Hat EL4 vs. SuSE ES 9
 
All,

Hello. I am about to purchase a new server for my network and wanted your opinion on which server operating system you think would be best for my needs. Note that I have primarily been looking at Red Hat EL4 and SuSE ES 9 but am open to other suggestions.

At first, the server will be primarily used as a file server. Sharing network folders and staff "home" folders. However, I would like to run DHCP and DNS off of it not to far down the road. There is also a possibility that I will be using LDAP for authentification versus Microsoft's AD kerberos authentification.

I am really wanting to know what server operating system will be stable, flexible and will allow room for growth without causing too much of a headache. Thank you in advance and I look forward to hearing your opinions.

-dumbsheep

PS - When you reply, could you please tell me why you chose the server operating system that you think is best. Thanks!

PSS - Has anyone used Novell's OpenEnterprise Server? I hear it's supposed to be like Microsoft's Server 2003 w/AD but a lot better. Thanks again

born4linux 07-12-2005 07:53 PM

personally, i'd use SLES9 - it has tools that are easier to use compared to RHEL4 (yeah, you can use webmin, but you need to install it). YaST of SLES9 runs in TUI and easier to follow compared to the tools of RHEL4.

heh, MS's AD is based from Novell's eDirectory. and OES and SLES9 are two diff packages: OES comes with SLES9 and other apps (like iFolder - if i remember it correctly). SLES9 is SLES9. :)

you can try other RHEL4 based distro (like Tao Linux or CentOS) so you can check it out without having to pay the $$$. OES also has a downloadable version which you can evaluate before buying the fully supported version.

Lleb_KCir 07-12-2005 08:39 PM

for just being a fileserver, dns, and later ldap any linux distro will do you just fine, but from what i have heard talking to people in my LUG (linux user group) most of them point out that the RHE line has about as stable as it comes to NFS for linux. NFS in linux is weak and about 10 years behind were it could/should be for a lot of reasons, but by sticking with the RHE for servers and FC for workstations things seem to work better.

i personally have a debian system running as my NFS and after fighting with it to work has been very stable for me with only miner issues from time to time causing me to restart the NFS server when it tries to hang.

this is NOT from experiance on my part, only from listening to a handful of members in my LUG who have been linux guys in the field for 10+ years each.

i like debian, but have used and liked Whitebox, and when i rebuild my web/e-mail server will be running CentOS for the simple reason one of my LUG friends has a handful of scripts for customizing and speeding up the configuration of that type of server to run in the RH fork enviroment.

dumbsheep 07-13-2005 06:51 AM

Thanks for the suggestions. What about SME Server? I've heard good things about it and read about it but haven't ever used it. As far as workstations, we have all Windows PCs and 2 OS X Macs. We will be adding Linux workstations eventually. So the server that I do pick must play nice with all platforms if possible. Thanks again.

-dumbsheep


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:25 AM.