[ale] Preferred server dists

[Beddingfield, Allen]

Before we setup our dedicated colo site, we were essentially using
Rackspace cloud hosting for DR.  Since there was no SUSE variant available
through them, our choices were Arch, CentOS, Debian, and Ubuntu.  I went
with Arch, and things went well.  We now have a dedicated colo site with
SLES and SLES HAE, and have left the Rackspace VMs behind.  I think it
just depends on what you are most familiar/comfortable with.  Since my
Debian/Ubuntu experience has pretty much been around getting familiar
enough with it to pass the LPIC tests, I would feel totally uncomfortable
with deploying that in a server setting - not because of any problem with
the OS, but because of my lack of knowing it inside out/up down the way I
know some other distributions.
Allen B.
-- 
Allen Beddingfield
Systems Engineer
The University of Alabama




On 2/27/13 4:13 PM, "JD" <jdp at algoloma.com> wrote:

>I would never deploy arch to any server farm.  It is probably just my
>ignorance
>about the package management.
>
>I might use it on a personal desktop, though I did my time already with
>Slackware and SLS in the early 1990s. No need to relive that.
>
>
>On 02/27/2013 05:05 PM, Erik Mathis wrote:
>> HA!
>> 
>> Arch is anything but simple. We are working on swapping out of all our
>>arch
>> boxes with centos. It offers predictable updates and it not going to
>>swap out
>> subsystems on you. (systemd and the one where they moved /lib to
>>/var/lib) If
>> you are a one man shop go for easy (ubuntu, centos, suse) If you love
>>spending
>> hours of configuring and tweaking, use arch or gentoo.
>> 
>> -Erik-
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 02/27/2013 02:54 PM, Beddingfield, Allen wrote:
>>> Mainly because it is dead simple.  Really the only thing that should be
>>> running is iptables, apache, and whatever you have running in apache
>>>(php, etcŠ).
>>> Allen B.
>>> -- 
>>> Allen Beddingfield
>>> Systems Engineer
>>> The University of Alabama
>>>
>>> From: dev null zero two
>>><dev.null.02 at gmail.com<mailto:dev.null.02 at gmail.com>>
>>> Reply-To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts <ale at ale.org<mailto:ale at ale.org>>
>>> Date: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 1:19 PM
>>> To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts <ale at ale.org<mailto:ale at ale.org>>
>>> Subject: Re: [ale] Preferred server dists
>>>
>>>
>>> just curious, why Arch for a Web box? not sure I'd ever want bleeding
>>>edge on
>>> a "production" box.
>>>
>>> Sent from my mobile. Please excuse the brevity, spelling, and
>>>punctuation.
>>>
>>> On Feb 27, 2013 2:16 PM, "Beddingfield, Allen"
>>> <allen at ua.edu<mailto:allen at ua.edu>> wrote:
>>> Are you looking for a free distro, or for a commercially supported one?
>>> If commercially supported - I would select SUSE Linux Enterprise
>>>without
>>> question.
>>> For free, I would go with either OpenSUSE (despite the shorter
>>>lifecycle,
>>> OS upgrades are easy enough with the occasional "zypper dup") or Arch.
>>> SUSE/OpenSUSE will give you Apparmor for some extra security.  Arch
>>>will
>>> give you an extremely simple, efficient, and clean setup.
>>>
>>> Just my $0.02 worth.
>>> Allen B.
>>> -- 
>>> Allen Beddingfield
>>> Systems Engineer
>>> The University of Alabama
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/27/13 11:57 AM, "Nolan Voight"
>>> <nolan.voight at gmail.com<mailto:nolan.voight at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> New web project, setting up a new server for it, no need to carry over
>>>> what I'd set up before. Just making a quick survey--which distribution
>>>> do y'all prefer for a web-facing server? Debian was the most widely
>>>> preferred when I last changed things  several years ago.
>_______________________________________________
>Ale mailing list
>Ale at ale.org
>http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo