Web server / email box -- which Linux do I choose?

[Zorn]

I have experience setting up web sites and email servers on Microsoft platforms, but am a complete newb when it comes to Linux. I got a couple static ips from my ISP and I want to install a cheap web server / email server at home and figured Linux was the way to go; however, a comple of questions:

Will the personal edition of Redhat, SuSe, etc. work, or do I need the Professional editions? I read the boxes and perused the sites, and it seems that the Pro editions come with Apache, etc., but are much more expesive. Do I need any additional software for the email server?

Which Linux ver. is best, SuSe, Redhat, others? Does it really matter? Any opinions would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Nothinman]

Download whatever you want and see if it works for you (SuSe only has a live-eval CD for download though).

Any version of Linux will work, it's all personal preferance after that, and mine happens to be Debian.

 

[BatmanNate]

Check out the Mitel Networks SME Server. It is built on a redhat package, will install and configure Apache for webserving and Qmail for mail serving. It can be administered through a remote webbrowser, and supports a variety of other easy to set up services like FTP, SSH, DNS, etc. It's good for n00b's, I started with it and then customized it with the command line as I delved deeper.

 

[Audiofight]

If you aren't on a high-speed connection, PM me and I will burn you a copy of Red Hat 7.2 that I have on cd at my house right now and mail them off to you.

I am starting to delve into Linux myself and will be starting to configure my Apache web server here in the next couple weeks. My version of RH had Apache included.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: audiofight
If you aren't on a high-speed connection, PM me and I will burn you a copy of Red Hat 7.2 that I have on cd at my house right now and mail them off to you.

I am starting to delve into Linux myself and will be starting to configure my Apache web server here in the next couple weeks. My version of RH had Apache included.

But you arent using it because you know its horribly out of date and there are several vulnerabilities in it right? (ie update apache)

 

[Nothinman]

But you arent using it because you know its horribly out of date and there are several vulnerabilities in it right? (ie update apache)

It's perfectly fine to be running 7.2, infact it's probably smarter to run that than 8.0 still. Getting and installing the errata RPMs is 1 command away, and they're significantly smaller than the whole ISO.

 

[TheOmegaCode]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

But you arent using it because you know its horribly out of date and there are several vulnerabilities in it right? (ie update apache)

It's perfectly fine to be running 7.2, infact it's probably smarter to run that than 8.0 still. Getting and installing the errata RPMs is 1 command away, and they're significantly smaller than the whole ISO.

I'm pretty sure he's referring to Apache...

My vote is for Debian, but nobody ever listens to me...

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

But you arent using it because you know its horribly out of date and there are several vulnerabilities in it right? (ie update apache)

It's perfectly fine to be running 7.2, infact it's probably smarter to run that than 8.0 still. Getting and installing the errata RPMs is 1 command away, and they're significantly smaller than the whole ISO.

I meant apache.

 

[Zorn]

Thanks for the info. I am a Linux newb, huh? -- I was considering paying pay for it

audiofight: I've got the bandwidth to download the files, but thanks for the offer.

 

[Flatline]

I always encourage paying for Linux products; let's give these guys some of our hard-earned cash for their effort

Besides, it's always nice to be able to call someone for support when you need it

 

[Nothinman]

I always encourage paying for Linux products; let's give these guys some of our hard-earned cash for their effort

Definatley, it's always a good idea to show appreciation. But it's also one of OSS's best points to be able to download the software completely free to be sure it can do what you need it to first, then pay later.

 

[bromer]

Originally posted by: Flatline
I always encourage paying for Linux products; let's give these guys some of our hard-earned cash for their effort

Besides, it's always nice to be able to call someone for support when you need it

No! It much better that the sourcecode i free to read and modify. If people wanna earn money on their code they should offer support! Opensource is a very strong movement., and I think it will continue to be that way.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: bromer

Originally posted by: Flatline
I always encourage paying for Linux products; let's give these guys some of our hard-earned cash for their effort

Besides, it's always nice to be able to call someone for support when you need it

No! It much better that the sourcecode i free to read and modify. If people wanna earn money on their code they should offer support! Opensource is a very strong movement., and I think it will continue to be that way.

Yes! Even the gnu project used to sell tapes of their software for money. The source will still be out there, but paying for a professional distribution is fine. I generally buy every OpenBSD release to help support the project, and I still download the source for free.

 

[Flatline]

Bromer, I was NOT saying that the products shouldn't stay open source...I would NEVER say that.

I even said that it was for support reasons (double meaning...support for your product and supporting the developers who work to bring us open source projects)

 

[bromer]

Originally posted by: Flatline
Bromer, I was NOT saying that the products shouldn't stay open source...I would NEVER say that.

I even said that it was for support reasons (double meaning...support for your product and supporting the developers who work to bring us open source projects)

nice to hear