I want to do Linux on my server...which version?

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Spyro

You rang? I was busy for the weekend.

Me too, but not too busy

What maintenance do you really have to do on your boxes? I have a series of generic perl scripts run by cron to do the automatic maintenance stuff (clean up /tmp on a regular basis), compress and email my logs (I prefer my scripts to logrotate) to me, and so on and so forth. The fact of the matter is, the last time I touched our mail server was a simple upgrade of its webmail software. When I started on it, I recompiled Apache from source, disabled everything I wasn't using, and then chrooted it with PHP (again, from source, disabling the things I wasn't needing), and Postgres. All of the software on the box is as secure as I believe I can make it. When I last had to update apache (mod_ssl vuln), it was a simple ./install-apache.pl script I've premade to handle all my apache installations. Any serious admin likely has scripts to maintain their boxes for them. A 15 minute script pays for itself after day 1.

I meant software maintenace, i.e. lots and lots of upgrades. Most servers probably wouldn't have to worry about that though, but you still can't top an "apt-get upgrade".

Never used Debian extensively as I have Slack, but there's a reason for that. For all its capabilities, I am extremely RARELY adding/removing/updating software on my servers. When I am, it's scheduled downtime anyways, it's not like it needs to be uberquick, and besides, apt would be lost on me because I want the control over the finished binary, not just picking where its installed to.

Well is installing/removing/updating stuff isn't really a major issue then you might as well use slackware

That's your opinion, being someone else, I found debian somewhat lacking in the minimalism department, and also in the desktop department. It's basically the average distribution stuck between RedHat and Slackware. It's the middle of the road distro that has both good and bad points from both sides.

Lacking in minimalism.....

You must be kidding me right, with a base install of about 56 MB, I hesitate to ask what you mean by "lacking in minimalism". And what do you mean by debian's lacking in the dektop area??? I have five and nine year olds who use kde on my system. Besides the wallpaper, all window managers are pretty much the same no matter what OS you're using. And if you're talking about redhat's great multitude of wizards.... lol Because redhat still has rpm hell unless you use apt4rpm and even then somethings still won't install right. And the after-install configuration of debian packages takes care of the things that red hatters would have to use wizards for. And for eerything else there's webmin I still haven't seen one real bad point about debian. Debian is minimal, versatile, and functional.

Point 1 for slackware, type swaret -- update to check, swaret --upgrade to upgrade... how hard is it?

For the rest and the last of your post... it isn't the minimalism of the amount of installed packs, it is the actual size of the installed packs, Debian (like mandrake and RedHat) has the nasty habit of building in extras into just about every package... slackware has never had that habit... which is why a tool like slacktool will download and compile most packs simple enough for slack but will not work on another distro... slack is the cleanest distro with the cleanest packs you will ever find, there is no question about that, no bells, no whistles but it will swallow just about every ./configure --option you can throw at it...

 

[Spyro]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

You rang? I was busy for the weekend.

Me too, but not too busy

What maintenance do you really have to do on your boxes? I have a series of generic perl scripts run by cron to do the automatic maintenance stuff (clean up /tmp on a regular basis), compress and email my logs (I prefer my scripts to logrotate) to me, and so on and so forth. The fact of the matter is, the last time I touched our mail server was a simple upgrade of its webmail software. When I started on it, I recompiled Apache from source, disabled everything I wasn't using, and then chrooted it with PHP (again, from source, disabling the things I wasn't needing), and Postgres. All of the software on the box is as secure as I believe I can make it. When I last had to update apache (mod_ssl vuln), it was a simple ./install-apache.pl script I've premade to handle all my apache installations. Any serious admin likely has scripts to maintain their boxes for them. A 15 minute script pays for itself after day 1.

I meant software maintenace, i.e. lots and lots of upgrades. Most servers probably wouldn't have to worry about that though, but you still can't top an "apt-get upgrade".

Never used Debian extensively as I have Slack, but there's a reason for that. For all its capabilities, I am extremely RARELY adding/removing/updating software on my servers. When I am, it's scheduled downtime anyways, it's not like it needs to be uberquick, and besides, apt would be lost on me because I want the control over the finished binary, not just picking where its installed to.

Well is installing/removing/updating stuff isn't really a major issue then you might as well use slackware

That's your opinion, being someone else, I found debian somewhat lacking in the minimalism department, and also in the desktop department. It's basically the average distribution stuck between RedHat and Slackware. It's the middle of the road distro that has both good and bad points from both sides.

Lacking in minimalism.....

You must be kidding me right, with a base install of about 56 MB, I hesitate to ask what you mean by "lacking in minimalism". And what do you mean by debian's lacking in the dektop area??? I have five and nine year olds who use kde on my system. Besides the wallpaper, all window managers are pretty much the same no matter what OS you're using. And if you're talking about redhat's great multitude of wizards.... lol Because redhat still has rpm hell unless you use apt4rpm and even then somethings still won't install right. And the after-install configuration of debian packages takes care of the things that red hatters would have to use wizards for. And for eerything else there's webmin I still haven't seen one real bad point about debian. Debian is minimal, versatile, and functional.

Point 1 for slackware, type swaret -- update to check, swaret --upgrade to upgrade... how hard is it?

For the rest and the last of your post... it isn't the minimalism of the amount of installed packs, it is the actual size of the installed packs, Debian (like mandrake and RedHat) has the nasty habit of building in extras into just about every package... slackware has never had that habit... which is why a tool like slacktool will download and compile most packs simple enough for slack but will not work on another distro... slack is the cleanest distro with the cleanest packs you will ever find, there is no question about that, no bells, no whistles but it will swallow just about every ./configure --option you can throw at it...

Ahhhhhh....... Well...... I agree

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

You rang? I was busy for the weekend.

Me too, but not too busy

What maintenance do you really have to do on your boxes? I have a series of generic perl scripts run by cron to do the automatic maintenance stuff (clean up /tmp on a regular basis), compress and email my logs (I prefer my scripts to logrotate) to me, and so on and so forth. The fact of the matter is, the last time I touched our mail server was a simple upgrade of its webmail software. When I started on it, I recompiled Apache from source, disabled everything I wasn't using, and then chrooted it with PHP (again, from source, disabling the things I wasn't needing), and Postgres. All of the software on the box is as secure as I believe I can make it. When I last had to update apache (mod_ssl vuln), it was a simple ./install-apache.pl script I've premade to handle all my apache installations. Any serious admin likely has scripts to maintain their boxes for them. A 15 minute script pays for itself after day 1.

I meant software maintenace, i.e. lots and lots of upgrades. Most servers probably wouldn't have to worry about that though, but you still can't top an "apt-get upgrade".

Never used Debian extensively as I have Slack, but there's a reason for that. For all its capabilities, I am extremely RARELY adding/removing/updating software on my servers. When I am, it's scheduled downtime anyways, it's not like it needs to be uberquick, and besides, apt would be lost on me because I want the control over the finished binary, not just picking where its installed to.

Well is installing/removing/updating stuff isn't really a major issue then you might as well use slackware

That's your opinion, being someone else, I found debian somewhat lacking in the minimalism department, and also in the desktop department. It's basically the average distribution stuck between RedHat and Slackware. It's the middle of the road distro that has both good and bad points from both sides.

Lacking in minimalism.....

You must be kidding me right, with a base install of about 56 MB, I hesitate to ask what you mean by "lacking in minimalism". And what do you mean by debian's lacking in the dektop area??? I have five and nine year olds who use kde on my system. Besides the wallpaper, all window managers are pretty much the same no matter what OS you're using. And if you're talking about redhat's great multitude of wizards.... lol Because redhat still has rpm hell unless you use apt4rpm and even then somethings still won't install right. And the after-install configuration of debian packages takes care of the things that red hatters would have to use wizards for. And for eerything else there's webmin I still haven't seen one real bad point about debian. Debian is minimal, versatile, and functional.

Point 1 for slackware, type swaret -- update to check, swaret --upgrade to upgrade... how hard is it?

For the rest and the last of your post... it isn't the minimalism of the amount of installed packs, it is the actual size of the installed packs, Debian (like mandrake and RedHat) has the nasty habit of building in extras into just about every package... slackware has never had that habit... which is why a tool like slacktool will download and compile most packs simple enough for slack but will not work on another distro... slack is the cleanest distro with the cleanest packs you will ever find, there is no question about that, no bells, no whistles but it will swallow just about every ./configure --option you can throw at it...

Ahhhhhh....... Well...... I agree

My turn to go :Q

 

[Spyro]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

You rang? I was busy for the weekend.

Me too, but not too busy

What maintenance do you really have to do on your boxes? I have a series of generic perl scripts run by cron to do the automatic maintenance stuff (clean up /tmp on a regular basis), compress and email my logs (I prefer my scripts to logrotate) to me, and so on and so forth. The fact of the matter is, the last time I touched our mail server was a simple upgrade of its webmail software. When I started on it, I recompiled Apache from source, disabled everything I wasn't using, and then chrooted it with PHP (again, from source, disabling the things I wasn't needing), and Postgres. All of the software on the box is as secure as I believe I can make it. When I last had to update apache (mod_ssl vuln), it was a simple ./install-apache.pl script I've premade to handle all my apache installations. Any serious admin likely has scripts to maintain their boxes for them. A 15 minute script pays for itself after day 1.

I meant software maintenace, i.e. lots and lots of upgrades. Most servers probably wouldn't have to worry about that though, but you still can't top an "apt-get upgrade".

Never used Debian extensively as I have Slack, but there's a reason for that. For all its capabilities, I am extremely RARELY adding/removing/updating software on my servers. When I am, it's scheduled downtime anyways, it's not like it needs to be uberquick, and besides, apt would be lost on me because I want the control over the finished binary, not just picking where its installed to.

Well is installing/removing/updating stuff isn't really a major issue then you might as well use slackware

That's your opinion, being someone else, I found debian somewhat lacking in the minimalism department, and also in the desktop department. It's basically the average distribution stuck between RedHat and Slackware. It's the middle of the road distro that has both good and bad points from both sides.

Lacking in minimalism.....

You must be kidding me right, with a base install of about 56 MB, I hesitate to ask what you mean by "lacking in minimalism". And what do you mean by debian's lacking in the dektop area??? I have five and nine year olds who use kde on my system. Besides the wallpaper, all window managers are pretty much the same no matter what OS you're using. And if you're talking about redhat's great multitude of wizards.... lol Because redhat still has rpm hell unless you use apt4rpm and even then somethings still won't install right. And the after-install configuration of debian packages takes care of the things that red hatters would have to use wizards for. And for eerything else there's webmin I still haven't seen one real bad point about debian. Debian is minimal, versatile, and functional.

Point 1 for slackware, type swaret -- update to check, swaret --upgrade to upgrade... how hard is it?

For the rest and the last of your post... it isn't the minimalism of the amount of installed packs, it is the actual size of the installed packs, Debian (like mandrake and RedHat) has the nasty habit of building in extras into just about every package... slackware has never had that habit... which is why a tool like slacktool will download and compile most packs simple enough for slack but will not work on another distro... slack is the cleanest distro with the cleanest packs you will ever find, there is no question about that, no bells, no whistles but it will swallow just about every ./configure --option you can throw at it...

Ahhhhhh....... Well...... I agree

My turn to go :Q

Blast you SnapIT, I'm probably going to start recommending slackware for servers too. I love it when I learn something new here in ATOS

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

You rang? I was busy for the weekend.

Me too, but not too busy

What maintenance do you really have to do on your boxes? I have a series of generic perl scripts run by cron to do the automatic maintenance stuff (clean up /tmp on a regular basis), compress and email my logs (I prefer my scripts to logrotate) to me, and so on and so forth. The fact of the matter is, the last time I touched our mail server was a simple upgrade of its webmail software. When I started on it, I recompiled Apache from source, disabled everything I wasn't using, and then chrooted it with PHP (again, from source, disabling the things I wasn't needing), and Postgres. All of the software on the box is as secure as I believe I can make it. When I last had to update apache (mod_ssl vuln), it was a simple ./install-apache.pl script I've premade to handle all my apache installations. Any serious admin likely has scripts to maintain their boxes for them. A 15 minute script pays for itself after day 1.

I meant software maintenace, i.e. lots and lots of upgrades. Most servers probably wouldn't have to worry about that though, but you still can't top an "apt-get upgrade".

Never used Debian extensively as I have Slack, but there's a reason for that. For all its capabilities, I am extremely RARELY adding/removing/updating software on my servers. When I am, it's scheduled downtime anyways, it's not like it needs to be uberquick, and besides, apt would be lost on me because I want the control over the finished binary, not just picking where its installed to.

Well is installing/removing/updating stuff isn't really a major issue then you might as well use slackware

That's your opinion, being someone else, I found debian somewhat lacking in the minimalism department, and also in the desktop department. It's basically the average distribution stuck between RedHat and Slackware. It's the middle of the road distro that has both good and bad points from both sides.

Lacking in minimalism.....

You must be kidding me right, with a base install of about 56 MB, I hesitate to ask what you mean by "lacking in minimalism". And what do you mean by debian's lacking in the dektop area??? I have five and nine year olds who use kde on my system. Besides the wallpaper, all window managers are pretty much the same no matter what OS you're using. And if you're talking about redhat's great multitude of wizards.... lol Because redhat still has rpm hell unless you use apt4rpm and even then somethings still won't install right. And the after-install configuration of debian packages takes care of the things that red hatters would have to use wizards for. And for eerything else there's webmin I still haven't seen one real bad point about debian. Debian is minimal, versatile, and functional.

Point 1 for slackware, type swaret -- update to check, swaret --upgrade to upgrade... how hard is it?

For the rest and the last of your post... it isn't the minimalism of the amount of installed packs, it is the actual size of the installed packs, Debian (like mandrake and RedHat) has the nasty habit of building in extras into just about every package... slackware has never had that habit... which is why a tool like slacktool will download and compile most packs simple enough for slack but will not work on another distro... slack is the cleanest distro with the cleanest packs you will ever find, there is no question about that, no bells, no whistles but it will swallow just about every ./configure --option you can throw at it...

Ahhhhhh....... Well...... I agree

My turn to go :Q

Blast you SnapIT, I'm probably going to start recommending slackware for servers too. I love it when I learn something new here in ATOS

That is why we are all here, to inform the ones who want to know... and to learn new things ourselves, if you got the space, try slack 9.0, if you run into any probs, you know where to find me.. i am downloading debian ATM... maybe i will get something new to recommend for desktops... it get's kinda tirening to have to download a lot when you install every machine...

I like how we can get to a point where everyone can have their view and it's cool, and everyone learns something... i know i have, it was a while since i tried deb last...

I haven't given up on the idea of creating an optimized solution as a boot- compressed distro a la Knoppix yet though, even though i love knoppix i would like a solution with fluxbox, fbdesk as an option (for the ones who cannot live without desktop icons) and the most necessary tools...

Do you have any tools that you would like included on such a cd? except for what goes on a normal slack distro (ridded of the bloat of KDE, Gnome, Mozilla and Netscape, but with Phoenix... )? if so, please PM me... naturally, there will be two versions, one for office apps and one for rescue only... with debian tools included... heh... combine the best of the best and you get something that works...

 

[Spyro]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

You rang? I was busy for the weekend.

Me too, but not too busy

What maintenance do you really have to do on your boxes? I have a series of generic perl scripts run by cron to do the automatic maintenance stuff (clean up /tmp on a regular basis), compress and email my logs (I prefer my scripts to logrotate) to me, and so on and so forth. The fact of the matter is, the last time I touched our mail server was a simple upgrade of its webmail software. When I started on it, I recompiled Apache from source, disabled everything I wasn't using, and then chrooted it with PHP (again, from source, disabling the things I wasn't needing), and Postgres. All of the software on the box is as secure as I believe I can make it. When I last had to update apache (mod_ssl vuln), it was a simple ./install-apache.pl script I've premade to handle all my apache installations. Any serious admin likely has scripts to maintain their boxes for them. A 15 minute script pays for itself after day 1.

I meant software maintenace, i.e. lots and lots of upgrades. Most servers probably wouldn't have to worry about that though, but you still can't top an "apt-get upgrade".

Never used Debian extensively as I have Slack, but there's a reason for that. For all its capabilities, I am extremely RARELY adding/removing/updating software on my servers. When I am, it's scheduled downtime anyways, it's not like it needs to be uberquick, and besides, apt would be lost on me because I want the control over the finished binary, not just picking where its installed to.

Well is installing/removing/updating stuff isn't really a major issue then you might as well use slackware

That's your opinion, being someone else, I found debian somewhat lacking in the minimalism department, and also in the desktop department. It's basically the average distribution stuck between RedHat and Slackware. It's the middle of the road distro that has both good and bad points from both sides.

Lacking in minimalism.....

You must be kidding me right, with a base install of about 56 MB, I hesitate to ask what you mean by "lacking in minimalism". And what do you mean by debian's lacking in the dektop area??? I have five and nine year olds who use kde on my system. Besides the wallpaper, all window managers are pretty much the same no matter what OS you're using. And if you're talking about redhat's great multitude of wizards.... lol Because redhat still has rpm hell unless you use apt4rpm and even then somethings still won't install right. And the after-install configuration of debian packages takes care of the things that red hatters would have to use wizards for. And for eerything else there's webmin I still haven't seen one real bad point about debian. Debian is minimal, versatile, and functional.

Point 1 for slackware, type swaret -- update to check, swaret --upgrade to upgrade... how hard is it?

For the rest and the last of your post... it isn't the minimalism of the amount of installed packs, it is the actual size of the installed packs, Debian (like mandrake and RedHat) has the nasty habit of building in extras into just about every package... slackware has never had that habit... which is why a tool like slacktool will download and compile most packs simple enough for slack but will not work on another distro... slack is the cleanest distro with the cleanest packs you will ever find, there is no question about that, no bells, no whistles but it will swallow just about every ./configure --option you can throw at it...

Ahhhhhh....... Well...... I agree

My turn to go :Q

Blast you SnapIT, I'm probably going to start recommending slackware for servers too. I love it when I learn something new here in ATOS

That is why we are all here, to inform the ones who want to know... and to learn new things ourselves, if you got the space, try slack 9.0, if you run into any probs, you know where to find me.. i am downloading debian ATM... maybe i will get something new to recommend for desktops... it get's kinda tirening to have to download a lot when you install every machine...

I like how we can get to a point where everyone can have their view and it's cool, and everyone learns something... i know i have, it was a while since i tried deb last...

I haven't given up on the idea of creating an optimized solution as a boot- compressed distro a la Knoppix yet though, even though i love knoppix i would like a solution with fluxbox, fbdesk as an option (for the ones who cannot live without desktop icons) and the most necessary tools...

Do you have any tools that you would like included on such a cd? except for what goes on a normal slack distro (ridded of the bloat of KDE, Gnome, Mozilla and Netscape, but with Phoenix... )? if so, please PM me... naturally, there will be two versions, one for office apps and one for rescue only... with debian tools included... heh... combine the best of the best and you get something that works...

Well I'm definitely too tired to think of anything meaningful right now, but tommorow is a whole 'nother story

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Spyro

You rang? I was busy for the weekend.

Me too, but not too busy

What maintenance do you really have to do on your boxes? I have a series of generic perl scripts run by cron to do the automatic maintenance stuff (clean up /tmp on a regular basis), compress and email my logs (I prefer my scripts to logrotate) to me, and so on and so forth. The fact of the matter is, the last time I touched our mail server was a simple upgrade of its webmail software. When I started on it, I recompiled Apache from source, disabled everything I wasn't using, and then chrooted it with PHP (again, from source, disabling the things I wasn't needing), and Postgres. All of the software on the box is as secure as I believe I can make it. When I last had to update apache (mod_ssl vuln), it was a simple ./install-apache.pl script I've premade to handle all my apache installations. Any serious admin likely has scripts to maintain their boxes for them. A 15 minute script pays for itself after day 1.

I meant software maintenace, i.e. lots and lots of upgrades. Most servers probably wouldn't have to worry about that though, but you still can't top an "apt-get upgrade".

Never used Debian extensively as I have Slack, but there's a reason for that. For all its capabilities, I am extremely RARELY adding/removing/updating software on my servers. When I am, it's scheduled downtime anyways, it's not like it needs to be uberquick, and besides, apt would be lost on me because I want the control over the finished binary, not just picking where its installed to.

Well is installing/removing/updating stuff isn't really a major issue then you might as well use slackware

That's your opinion, being someone else, I found debian somewhat lacking in the minimalism department, and also in the desktop department. It's basically the average distribution stuck between RedHat and Slackware. It's the middle of the road distro that has both good and bad points from both sides.

Lacking in minimalism.....

You must be kidding me right, with a base install of about 56 MB, I hesitate to ask what you mean by "lacking in minimalism". And what do you mean by debian's lacking in the dektop area??? I have five and nine year olds who use kde on my system. Besides the wallpaper, all window managers are pretty much the same no matter what OS you're using. And if you're talking about redhat's great multitude of wizards.... lol Because redhat still has rpm hell unless you use apt4rpm and even then somethings still won't install right. And the after-install configuration of debian packages takes care of the things that red hatters would have to use wizards for. And for eerything else there's webmin I still haven't seen one real bad point about debian. Debian is minimal, versatile, and functional.

Point 1 for slackware, type swaret -- update to check, swaret --upgrade to upgrade... how hard is it?

For the rest and the last of your post... it isn't the minimalism of the amount of installed packs, it is the actual size of the installed packs, Debian (like mandrake and RedHat) has the nasty habit of building in extras into just about every package... slackware has never had that habit... which is why a tool like slacktool will download and compile most packs simple enough for slack but will not work on another distro... slack is the cleanest distro with the cleanest packs you will ever find, there is no question about that, no bells, no whistles but it will swallow just about every ./configure --option you can throw at it...

Ahhhhhh....... Well...... I agree

My turn to go :Q

Blast you SnapIT, I'm probably going to start recommending slackware for servers too. I love it when I learn something new here in ATOS

That is why we are all here, to inform the ones who want to know... and to learn new things ourselves, if you got the space, try slack 9.0, if you run into any probs, you know where to find me.. i am downloading debian ATM... maybe i will get something new to recommend for desktops... it get's kinda tirening to have to download a lot when you install every machine...

I like how we can get to a point where everyone can have their view and it's cool, and everyone learns something... i know i have, it was a while since i tried deb last...

I haven't given up on the idea of creating an optimized solution as a boot- compressed distro a la Knoppix yet though, even though i love knoppix i would like a solution with fluxbox, fbdesk as an option (for the ones who cannot live without desktop icons) and the most necessary tools...

Do you have any tools that you would like included on such a cd? except for what goes on a normal slack distro (ridded of the bloat of KDE, Gnome, Mozilla and Netscape, but with Phoenix... )? if so, please PM me... naturally, there will be two versions, one for office apps and one for rescue only... with debian tools included... heh... combine the best of the best and you get something that works...

Well I'm definitely too tired to think of anything meaningful right now, but tommorow is a whole 'nother story

No rush, i am still awaiting 2.6, so it might be a while, but if you have something you can't do without, i will consider it, that goes for all...

Anything that runs on slack that is.. heh... it will be slack based with fluxbox as the _only_ window manager, Phoenix (or MozillaFirebird as the morons decided to call it, yes, morons, damn morons), and very basic, that is 120 mb... i got 1800 to fill up... give me something...

 

[Sunner]

I will never, ever understand how anyone can use the FreeBSD installer and say it is confusing... you will have to tell me exactly WHAT is confusing about it... to me it is what an installer should be like...

To me it just feels kinda awkward, but that's more a habit thing I guess

Considdering the installers I feel the most familiar with are OpenBSD, Solaris(not the web/java interface crap), Gentoo, and RedHat, that might not be all that strange

By the way, for you Slack lovers, have you ever tried RockLinux?
Might be something for you

 

[SnapIT]

Hey sunner... it is not for everyone, as i assume you know OpenBSD is not for everyone, some people would have more problems figuring out that install than a slackware install...

The newest slack, you create your partitions by typing cfdisk, that is standard, you select where to install it, it asks you what filesystem you want and the formats you partitions... you select your source, your target, which packages to install... i just fail to see what is so confusing...

Will check out RockLinux... although i am on slack atm and downloading debians latest... so it might take a while before i get to try it out...

Thanx...

 

[SnapIT]

YES! Thank you Sunner... Rock linux is what i have been looking for, gentoo with the option flag of preference...

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: SnapIT
YES! Thank you Sunner... Rock linux is what i have been looking for, gentoo with the option flag of preference...

I figured a Slack user might like it

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Sunner

Originally posted by: SnapIT
YES! Thank you Sunner... Rock linux is what i have been looking for, gentoo with the option flag of preference...

I figured a Slack user might like it

Simplicity and minimalism... yes, i am skipping debian and going for rock... how did you find it, are you using it? I have always used Slackware for one simple reason, it has always been there, i was part of the test team in 93, not anymore, no time, too bad... but i am involved in other projects though...

 

[Sunner]

Not currently using it, since my boxen at home are OpenBSD, save for a Gentoo box, and at work it's Gentoo and RedHat.
I've used it before though, and Im planning on switching an OpenBSD box over to it at home after Im done moving(moving into a new apartment later today).

It's nice, worked very well when I last used it, and as the site says, it's very much "By Admins, For Admins".

Don't remember how I found it really...was quite some time ago...

 

[chsh1ca]

Originally posted by: Spyro
Me too, but not too busy

I meant software maintenace, i.e. lots and lots of upgrades. Most servers probably wouldn't have to worry about that though, but you still can't top an "apt-get upgrade".

Yes I can, for the reasons I stated above. I need to control the way in which Apache is configured, compiled, and installed from start to finish. Most distro-bound systems aren't chroot-friendly.

Well is installing/removing/updating stuff isn't really a major issue then you might as well use slackware

But then, when is it really a major issue? On the desktop. Make no mistake, were I not the capable admin I am, I would pick something easy on the desktop (right now I'm running Slack 8.1) for package updates, and just general use. However, I'm discussing servers.

Lacking in minimalism.....
You must be kidding me right, with a base install of about 56 MB, I hesitate to ask what you mean by "lacking in minimalism".

I mean having to manually remove packages after an installation if I want what I consider as a 'skeletal install'.

And what do you mean by debian's lacking in the dektop area??? I have five and nine year olds who use kde on my system. Besides the wallpaper, all window managers are pretty much the same no matter what OS you're using. And if you're talking about redhat's great multitude of wizards...

Uhh, I was referring to the desktop packages that come WITH the distribution. With something like Redhat, I know I'm going to have a whole slew of tools on a default desktop, plus RedHat offers extra CDs of stuff if you want to add more.

lol Because redhat still has rpm hell unless you use apt4rpm and even then somethings still won't install right. And the after-install configuration of debian packages takes care of the things that red hatters would have to use wizards for. And for eerything else there's webmin I still haven't seen one real bad point about debian. Debian is minimal, versatile, and functional.

I never said anything was necessarily bad about Debian, I just explained that other distributions do things better.

 

[Flatline]

You know, you NEVER "have to" use a wizard if you don't want to.

I'm not defending RedHat or Mandrake necessarily, but there is a "custom" install for both. You don't have to install anything you don't want to. As far as RPM hell, apt takes care of that quite nicely.

Having said the above, I absolutely love both Debian and Slack (I'm typing this on my XFS-Debian workstation at work, which is quintuple booting different distros at the moment) and would highly recommend them for both desktop and server use. I haven't had time to check out the *BSD side of things, but that's my next trip.

The biggest problem with using Deb or Slack for production servers is that there is not actual support available like there is for...say, RedHat or SuSE; frankly, if you install any of these distros properly and take a bit of care in configuring them, you don't have to worry about stability issues.

There, that ought to piss someone off enough to keep up this thread (thoroughly enjoying this one, by the way...somehow people have stayed civil and have actually been providing some nuggets of wisdom).

 

[HarryAngel]

Another vote for Debian!

 

[Spyro]

Originally posted by: HarryAngel
Another vote for Debian!

Read the whole thread

 

[HarryAngel]

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: HarryAngel
Another vote for Debian!

Read the whole thread

Do i have to? j/k

 

[chsh1ca]

Originally posted by: Flatline
The biggest problem with using Deb or Slack for production servers is that there is not actual support available like there is for...say, RedHat or SuSE; frankly, if you install any of these distros properly and take a bit of care in configuring them, you don't have to worry about stability issues.

There is so support for them. Why do you think admins exist in the first place?

Honestly, whenever an issue has arisen, I have fixed it myself without a need for support at all (which is why it is running in a production environment). This is true for 99% of problems with every OS. Do you call Microsoft because a Win2K Advanced Server bluescreens on you? No, of course not. Any time I've actually had an issue (all three of them) with an OS I've supported, it's been something that didn't get fixed by the supporting vendor anyway (Microsoft, Microsoft, and Microsoft). I can't see the real value in it. Now, for hardware, something I can't fix, sure, I concur completely with the need for enterprise-class support, but on the OS side, my experience has been that is a joke for open-sourced OSes.

 

[Flatline]

Hey, my company wanted a supported OS for peace of mind; it was hard enough convincing them to go open-source in the first place. I have yet to have an issue with my servers here, much less one that I couldn't fix (see the second paart of the quote above).

In other words, I agree with you, but if it makes it easier for a suit to swallow then it is useful.

 

[Spyro]

Originally posted by: HarryAngel

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: HarryAngel
Another vote for Debian!

Read the whole thread

Do i have to? j/k

Ehhh?? Well, no not really

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

Originally posted by: Flatline
As far as RPM hell, apt takes care of that quite nicely.

I would have to strongly disagree.

 

[Spyro]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: Flatline
I'm not defending RedHat or Mandrake necessarily, but there is a "custom" install for both. You don't have to install anything you don't want to. As far as RPM hell, apt takes care of that quite nicely.

I would have to strongly disagree.

Me too, but the question is which of those points do you disagree with

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: Flatline
I'm not defending RedHat or Mandrake necessarily, but there is a "custom" install for both. You don't have to install anything you don't want to. As far as RPM hell, apt takes care of that quite nicely.

I would have to strongly disagree.

Me too, but the question is which of those points do you disagree with

Oops, not in a very clear state of mind right now, I was referring to just the apt-rpm part. *goes to edit message*

 

[Rufio]

i just wanted to say that this is my most successful thread ever, and i did not post one bit of useful information into it.