which Linux is good for server?
 

Dear All,

i'm new in linux,i dont have so much information about linux, i have experience for 6 years in windows and i have 120 workstations,4 HP ML300 server ultra Scsi, i have active directory,file server,FTP server,

now i m done with windows i can handle it and troublshoot it i m kinda expert now in windows now i want to start LINUX

Can you please Advise me which Linux is the best to use it as server, i m confused i have asked afew guys one says use ubuntu,one says redhat,mandrake,deiban,SuSe, so i dont know which one i should use now, i found this site very useful so now i m gonna ask the members to guide me please


Thanking you

Kabul

Welcome to LQ!

I'm glad you didn't use the search function at LQ and put too big a load on the server; cause this question has been asked so many times, you'd probably get 100 hits! The answer, of course, is

Slackware Linux

It depends what you want it for, but have a look at RedHat and/or Fedora (they're very similar and share a lot of code).

You can never get accurate answers to your question because there isn't one. Most people just tend to say their favourite distro is the best, but this is more distro evangelism than being helpful. Anyway, try a few distros on a test machine and then stick with the one that you feel comfortable using. Personally I would recommend CentOS (a free rebuild of Redhat Enterprise Linux) and Debian if you want a stable Linux server OS.

I think that Gentoo is the most popular server distribution. I would recommend getting a good book on securing Linux. You haven't said what type of server. You will install only a fraction of what you would on a workstation for security reasons, and so it really doesn't matter much which distro you use because installing only Apache or Mysql or a Mail Server, you will eliminate most any difference that would exist between distros. For a server that offers a service to the internet, you also do not want to install X windows. The less you install, the less a hacker can try to attack.
If you are new to linux, I would recommend either SuSE or RedHat for a server. The www.tldp.org website has a 800 page book "Securing & Optimizing Linux: The Ultimate Solution". It is based mostly on Red Hat.
http://www.tldp.org/guides.html

Thank you all for quick replies

lets say the linux which i m going to install should support mailserver,ftp,mysql,file server, all server, i have downloaded, Debian,Ubuntu server,and downloading the mandrake,Fedora,i couldnt find the (REDHAT enterprise v4) for downloading,

i have also plan to download all of them and install one by one,i m also thinking about linux which can give me good support,so i can find more about its troubleshooting and support online, let me know what do you think?

Thanks a lot

Kabul

That's a very interesting statement, where did that one come
from? I've seen many a Linux server, in many organisations,
not one of them were Gentoo. RedHat (and Centos), Suse,
Debian, even the odd slackware-box. But Gentoo?


Cheers,
Tink

Even though I'm not a big fan of it, I think that Debian would
have to be the preferred option for you. It's entirely community
driven, has a strong & helpful user-base and is reasonably easy
to administer if you ask the right questions; if the requirements
for varied software-packages aren't too many Slack may be a
good choice, too. It's quite secure by default, has no gimmicks
and just works. Downside is you need to learn a lot. If you want
"industry standard" RedHat (or its free derivative Centos) is an
option, too; personally I can't stand their package management,
and its common dependency hell.


Cheers,
Tink

I'm going to have to agree with Tinkster here. I work in many different organizations as a network consutlant, and I've seen Red Hat (and Fedora) SuSe (for OpenXchange), Mandrake, and FreeBSD, but I've never come across Gentoo as a server anywhere, either.

I don't remember the name of the article, but it was about the difficulty that SuSE and RedHat were having getting selling to large municipalities and corporations, such as Berlin, because the Larger organizations had the talent so they don't need to purchase a support package, but were using their own custom gentoo based installations instead. I'll have to see if I can find the article.

If I'm wrong, I'm sure it won't be the last time.

I didn't say you're wrong; it is just completely contradictory to
my personal experience. And specially with large organisations
(and more so within government) the use of a distro that has no
contractual base to sue anyone in case of failure seems quite
unlikely (again, just my 20 years in IT speaking ;}) ... I'd be quite
interested in that article!.


Cheers,
Tink

Weigh that against the licensing fees for a large municipality. Also, debian and gentoo will run on a number of machines that SuSE and RedHat won't. This wouldn't be a facter for most desktop users.

However, thinking about it, I believe you are correct. But when the overriding consideration is that the budget has already been slashed, and the IT department has a long Unix history, it may be the only option.

I think that one example is Vienna. Berlin may end up rolling their own even though SuSE was based in Germany.

Lastly, It's possible that I confused Debian and Gentoo.

If he finds the tldp book "Securing & Optimizing Linux: The Ultimate Solution" useful and bases his server on it's scripts and configurations, Fedora Core or Red Hat will be his best choice.

Reply
 

I would recommend Debian Linux. I choose Debian because it has a tremendous package management system with over 14,000 packages available in it. Debian strives to be stable over cutting edge which is always a plus with a server. Debian is very fast out of the box as well. Slackware is a nice choice as well, it's very fast and it's stable. Debian and Slackware are my favorite choices for a server. Gentoo is probably the best distro to learn on and offers great flexibility, but it uses a source based package system which can take an eternity to compile. Gentoo is best left to learn Linux on (in my opinion), or for a power users desktop. On the plus side it has the least amount of dependencies, can upgrade forever, and offers the best speed do to its source based system. Red Hat and the Red Hat based systems suck for servers. They're good for cutting your teeth on though.

Thank you all,

nobody speaks here about UBUNTU? could you please guys tell me how is this ubuntu?i get so much experience reading your messeges


thanking you guys

Kabul

As you have already found out: ask ten different people and you'll get ten different answers.

The truth is it doesn't matter which distro you use, all of them can be made to do the same things. My advice is to look at the websites of as many distros you can, draw up a shortlist of the ones you like the look at, test them, and choose for yourself.

If you are more concerned about support and ofcourse ease to manage, I would recommend you to try Ubuntu. They have released a new version in June 2006. The name is Ubuntu 6.06 LTS where LTS stands for Long Term Support. They have a large community to provide support. This version will be supported for the next 5 years.
This text belongs to the Ubuntu Website
For more information, visit their website
http://www.ubuntu.com/Welcome

[QUOTE=phil.d.g]As you have already found out: ask ten different people and you'll get ten different answers.


i know i will finaly stuck with one distro,

but i want to get idea of different users before i start installation, that would help me more, in here everyone speaks about thier favorite distro, i want to get more ideas of different users, and finaly i will pick one, as i said beforei have download like three iso,Debian,ubuntu,fedora,and i m downloading now the Mandrake v10.1 but i love to have distro and ofcourse one day i will start working with all of them, but now i wanna pick one and study about it for a while then i will start with others, and i want you guys to tell me which one should be my first choice thank you very much

Kabul

Mandrake 10.1 is old and probably not supported anymore, so I suggest you get Mandriva 2006 (Mandrake merged with Conectiva to create Mandriva). Ubuntu is derived from Debian, so they are quite similar. As a desktop OS, Ubuntu is ok, but if I was going to use Linux on an important server, I would just go for Debian Stable.

I guess you said that because, Ubuntu is based on Debian unstable. Or are they really different?

Yes, that the main reason why I would pick Debian instead of Ubuntu. Debian Stable undergoes more stability tests than most distros out there.

Hey Mandrake v10.1 i have downloaed already the 45%

i tried to download the mandriva 2006 the size of ISO is 674MB and the Mandrake is more than 2GB, why some of these ISO is more than 2gb or more like Debian is 4Gb i downloaded the 4gb and takes so much time :(

should i quit downloading the mandrake v10.1 and start with Mandrive 2006 so i can quickly download the mandrive

because it only 674MB and the mandrake 10.1 is 2Gb


Advise please

thanks alot

Mandriva isos are about 2 gigs. The free version of Mandriva is actually 1 dvd or 3 cds, so I guess you are downloading just one disc if you say its around 600 megs. You will need all 3 discs if you want to run a GUI. As to whether you should stop downloading Mandrake, I guess you could just finish downloading it, take it for a spin and then replace it with Mandriva whenever its convenient for you. You could also just quit the download and go straight for Mandriva 2006. Both are good options since you are just going to be trying them out and not yet using them for production.

[QUOTE=Kabul]
For a server I would recommend against Fedora. Fedora is RedHats Testing ground from new technologies. if you want something redhat based that is stable enough for a server check out CentOS. Fedora would be perfectly fine for a workstation, but a bad choice for a server imho...

Avoid ANY testing or experimental distros for server use..

For the same reason I run Debian Stable for my servers, it's rock solid and it works. but I would never consider using the testing or unstable branches of Debian for a server.. on the other hand I run the Debian unstable branch for my home workstation..

Server priorities are stability, uptime, security, and availability.