what is the current best flavor of linux for a server?

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by Nefarious1, Nov 14, 2004.

  1. Nefarious1

    Nefarious1 Guest

    This will be a file server running samba as a windows domain controller.

    I'm not interested in a bunch of GUI.
     
  2. Rob

    Rob OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2002
    Messages:
    88,630
    Likes Received:
    41
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Debian plus the latest Samba packages from samba.org, which is as easy as adding the right line to your apt sources file.
     
  3. Nefarious1

    Nefarious1 Guest

    thanks rob
     
  4. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    gentoo, slackware, fedora, rhel, etc, etc...

    there is no "Best" distro.
     
  5. Penguin Man

    Penguin Man Protect Your Digital Liberties

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2002
    Messages:
    21,696
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    For a server, I'd stay away from the user-friendly distros like SuSE, Ubuntu or Fedora. Gentoo or Debian is a good choice for a server, since they can be made very lightweight and very sure quite easily.
     
  6. xheliox

    xheliox It's Good To Be King

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Altamonte Springs, FL
    First, let me say -- this thread is just going to be a nightmare, because there's no consensus. It's almost like asking which flavor of soda is the best. It comes down to preference and style. There's probably no wrong answer. With that said... :)

    I couldn't disagree more, especially on the Gentoo suggestion. What makes a good server? The lightweight part, I agree. Less is more, no doubt. What also makes a good server is package testing and quality updates. The last thing an admin needs is to apply a Samba security update only to have his/her entire domain controller not restart properly. I know Gentoo has improved a great deal over the months and years, but I still see it as an immature distribution that still needs some time to evolve before I put it on my server boxes. :)

    Admittedly, Debian does have a very nice stable branch wihch as far as I'm concerned is as stable as a rock -- I use it at many locations for specific purposes. However, if you're looking for more advanced Samba features like advanced ACL's and an intuitive permissions interface, I don't think Debian (stable) is up to the task.

    The fact is, SuSE (now Novell) & RedHat (WhiteBox & Fedora included) have refined their products around the server market -- even if they're packed full of GUI options. They have focused on things like advanced ACL support for Samba, better & easier to use LDAP intergration, and other emerging authentication protocols. If you're concerned about "lightweight" installs, for RedHat systems, you can use kickstart files or just a plain custom install to strip just about everything you don't need from the installation. I have a custom version of Fedora running on a 64MB CF card. That's pretty lightweight.

    And after reading my own arguments, I know there are counter points to each of my claims.. and probably rightfully so. Again, it's a matter of style and experience. The fact is, if you have time, you should try and test them all. You may find that Gentoo or even a BSD distro does something amazingly well for your needs -- and isn't that what's most important? If it suites you and your needs well.. then screw what us opinionated Linux nerds have to say. :)

    PS - My arguement was based on using Samba, but I generally do advocate RedHat/WhiteBox/or Fedora for most Linux applications.
     
  7. CompiledMonkey

    CompiledMonkey New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2001
    Messages:
    8,528
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    I respect xheliox's opinion on this but I too would recommend Gentoo. It's a very lightweight, solid, and easy to manage distro.
     
  8. crontab

    crontab (uid = 0)

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2000
    Messages:
    23,458
    Likes Received:
    12
    Although a file server is a lightweight server almost any flavor of Linux will suffice depending on your storage, but in our US environment RHEL AS 3.0 U3 is the best flavor. Why? Because of the software/hardware support, from Veritas, Qlogic, Emulex, Legato, BMC, Oracle, Informix, StorageTek, HP, EMC, HItachi, Versant, etc... Suse comes in a close second with support, widely used in our UK offices.
     
  9. Nefarious1

    Nefarious1 Guest

    Well, I understand RHE, but I don't want to pay for it. This is a home file server and domain controller project to help me grasp better skills in relation to my job.


    I'm in process of downloading the 2gb of fedora right now.
     
  10. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    lets all be completely honest -- Fedora is the same damn thing as RHEL except without the crappy company and pricetag.
     
  11. Penguin Man

    Penguin Man Protect Your Digital Liberties

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2002
    Messages:
    21,696
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    Mostly, it's without the support. Which is fine for a home environment, but for a business environment it's something you want.

    Anyway, since this is a home application, yeah, I'd say any distro is fine. I'm assuming it's going behind a capable firewall, and that there won't be that many computers accessing it all at once, so super-tight security and super efficiency aren't that important. I still wouldn't recommend SuSE for the application, since you won't learn much from it (it puts things in weird places, so if you learn on it you'll be totally lost on a more normal Linux system), but aside from that anything should work :dunno:
     
  12. crontab

    crontab (uid = 0)

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2000
    Messages:
    23,458
    Likes Received:
    12
    Um, no.
     
  13. xheliox

    xheliox It's Good To Be King

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Altamonte Springs, FL
    Yeah, that couldn't be less true. Fedora is bleeding edge technology that expires every 6 months. RHEL is refined, methodical, and has a long shelf life of 5 years. Furthermore, RHEL has all been extensively tested and certified by various government agenices and large hardware/software vendors. RHEL is capable of running mission critical servers that cannot fail (life and death situations), Fedora is hardly capable of keeping anaconda from crashing at install. :p

    Edit: Forgot to mention the multiple platforms RHEL supports that Fedora does not. And the extensive update, management, and monitoring tools not found in non-enterprise version of RedHat/Fedora.
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2004
  14. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    and NONE of the reasons you state help him in his application.
     
  15. Nefarious1

    Nefarious1 Guest

    lol


    As far as a firewall, I'm not going to be super tight on this box. I'm on a private IP as it is. A linksys wireless ap/router will be plenty for my home environment. At work, we do nothing but customized ipcop boxes.


    My goal is basically to brush up on linux and learn samba for SOHO applications.
     
  16. crontab

    crontab (uid = 0)

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2000
    Messages:
    23,458
    Likes Received:
    12
    True. But that wasn't the point of his reply since it was directed at your blanket statement, which is now defunct.
     
  17. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    my post was made within the context of this thread. context is everything :squint:
     
  18. Jazz

    Jazz Powerhouse of the Scrum

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    11,339
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
  19. xheliox

    xheliox It's Good To Be King

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Altamonte Springs, FL
    No, but you said that RHEL and Fedora were the same. I was simply clarifying your statement. I never directly suggested he go with RHEL, I also threw WhiteBox (and RHEL clone) and Fedora into the mix.

    More ranting: You also declared RHEL to be "pricey" -- I don't see a starting price of $179 for a server "pricey". Have you seen what they get for Solaris, Windows, or other server operating environment?. RedHat is charging a fraction of that -- even for their high end server. So I also take issue with the term "pricey". I generally find that a customer of mine who invests $179 for RHEL ends up paying less in the long run, because it's likely I won't have to upgrade (just update) their server for years. If you go with something like Fedora, you have to upgrade at least once a year -- unless you want to trust a small group of volunteers to keep your system secure. :) Besides, most SOHO's who have been paying thousands of dollars for their software won't blink at a few hundred.
     
  20. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    yes, but for years one of the most compelling arguments red hat had was that it was a stable and FREE OS. When RH started charging for its product, they pissed off a LOT of people.

    Also, a starting price of $179 is only $20 less than the starting price of Windows 2003 Server ($199).

    Furthermore, I've seen several independent surveys where companies reported a lower total cost of ownership (albeit a higher initial investment) with Windows servers over Linux ones.
     
  21. xheliox

    xheliox It's Good To Be King

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Altamonte Springs, FL
    Yes, yes.. RedHat is evil for charging. I understand. Because free software is free as in 'free beer', right? Oh wait.. no. See: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

    Can you please show me where you're getting a copy of Windows 2003 Server for $199? You can get a 5 user CAL for that price.

    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/pricing.mspx
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/howtobuy/pricing.mspx

    Is there better legit OEM pricing? And does that $199 come with any user licenses? As you know, for that $179, you can add as many users as you want. And what about if you want your server to run Exchange? How much do they charge per client? We forget that $199 may be the base price (yet I doubt it) but then we get into adding MSSQL, Exchange, and god knows what other products that cost hundreds if not thousands of dollars.

    I can't talk about independent surveys, but I've run multiple ISPs and and I can speak that the Windows boxes always have more downtime and require more attention when patching. I can generally do everything short of adding a new kernel to my Linux boxes without completely taking my users offline... that's rarely the case with Windows.
     
  22. RaginBajin

    RaginBajin Have you punched a donkey today?

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    8,740
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NoVA
    Well, I think we all can't answer this question at all. He said he wants the best distro so he can learn for his job. I guess the real question is, What does your job use?

    If they use RH, then use RH.

    /thread.
     
  23. xheliox

    xheliox It's Good To Be King

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Altamonte Springs, FL
    His job is using IPCop, which isn't really a full fledged distro at all. So.. if he wants to learn Linux, he's going to need something more robust than that.

    And we could end the thread, but it's more fun pissing and moaning over stupid details. :)
     
  24. SLED

    SLED build an idiot proof device and someone else will

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2001
    Messages:
    28,118
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AZ, like a bauce!
    and there are still a few linux nazi's that haven't even shown up in this thread yet :mamoru:
     
  25. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    Meet Windows 2003 Web Server. MSRP : $199. I *SELL* 5 CALs for $150... My cost is less.

    Yes.

    Yes, you can host an unlimited number of samba users, unlimited number of login users. Unlimited web visitors. Unlimited email users. etc.

    as with windows.

    so how many users does linux support in exchange? Oh, is that ZERO? yep.. Gotta have windows for exchange... so compare apples to apples.

    But I'll assume you meant "email users" instead of "exchange". Which you could use Mail Enable, and it's FREE. And it's unlimited users -- thanks for asking.

    again, compare APPLES to APPLES!!! How much is MSSQL on linux? YOU CANNOT DO IT! How much is Exchange on linux? YOU CANNOT DO IT!

    MySQL IS FREE.
    MailEnable IS FREE.

    APPLES vs. APPLES.... Not a Kia vs. Mercedes Benz.

    Okay, well I can't help you if your techs are incompetant.

    Good day.
     

Share This Page