Your preference of linux OS?
Which would you prefer to run if you were to start a private tracker site (perhaps gazelle)?
Printable View
Your preference of linux OS?
Which would you prefer to run if you were to start a private tracker site (perhaps gazelle)?
I dont think it really matters tbh, its just your personal preference, i know people that swear by Gentoo and wont use anything else, others swear by Debian, others Ubuntu etc etc.
But if you put a gun to my head and said to me "choose" i would probably plump with Debian, why? i have no idea really, just seems Debian is geared more towards servers, Ubuntu more towards home, but then Ubuntu has a server distribution as well, but not sure what that is like.
So Debian if i "had" to choose.
Ubuntu is based on Debian "unstable".
Most web servers run Debian. It is considered very stable.
Debian is best for servers and ubuntu best for desktops
There basically the same, I've used before debian and ubuntu server. Didn't notice any difference except the package lifetime. (Some of their packages in Lenny's repo are two years old) Basically only real difference is ubuntu gets packages faster and debian well for LAMP stuff you're best off using dotdeb's repos. Reality of it is - it doesn't matter which one you choose.
The best distro is the one you like, simple as that.
Debian does have really old packages, didn't really like it when it came with, then changed to 8.04, imo, was way better then Debian. Just upgraded and am really liking Ubuntu 10.04 LTS, it's really smooth compared to 8.04. But you should try them out for yourself, you'll know in a month which one your gonna stick with. :)
If you need newer packages either run squeeze/sid or at least use apt-pinning for certain repos. The entire point of using debian on a server is because it's tried/tested/stable (at least the stable variant) and so naturally some of the packages will be outdated. You can always install new packages from source anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by amirji
By the way, one question to those used to Ubuntu.
I'm using 9.10, with a lot of tweaking and customization, and at the updates manager it has a huge button saying "upgrade to 10.04 LTS"... Does upgrading that way will keep my installed software and configurations, or will it wipeout what was installed and do a fresh install of 10.04, ignoring all that was behind ?
It just update all the packages and kernel etc. Config and other crap stay the same.
Generally if it's going to overwrite user edited config files on an upgrade you'll be given a prompt asking you whether you want to use the new config file, your old one, a patchwork of the two, or some other less useful options.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabalo
debian and slackware are the top of linux ever... personally, i very dislike ubuntu...:devil:
So, we can assume it's safe to do the upgrade?
I've never done it before, as I usually go for clean installations, but I'm reasonably willing to take the chance on this one, though it's my work laptop.
Well I upgraded 9.10 -> 10.04 by this way. Everything was fine :01:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabalo
I'd go with Ubuntu, because of the more frequent updates.Quote:
Originally Posted by AvailableName
This link will take you to a torrent of Gazelle running as a virtual machine under Debian.
I wouldn't use it for 'production', but it'll let you get your hands dirty with little hassle.
debian stable headless (no GUI).
From defaults I install:
sudo
ssh
and then I write a script to auto check for updates every 24 hours for security reasons
Also, anything I install outside of the distro (like gazelle) I manually compile with the newest version. Debian stable has up to date security fixes but not up to date software so everything I'm using I go out of my way to install newer versions manually.
Ubuntu is just debian with a different gui frontend and more desktop based applications packed in with it. For headless/server usage Debian should be your distro of choice. Using ubuntu as a server is the same thing as using a bloated version of debian. The only difference you would notice is one uses more ram and hdd space than the other.
I would rather use gentoo instead of ubuntu or debian. But if I had to pick between ubuntu and debian, I would pick debian.
1) don't manually compile stuff use package managers like aptitude they were created for a reason. You can get all the newest stuff for debian using aptitude if you know what you're doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielleD87
2) Ubuntu isn't just debian, it's based on debian and to the untrained eye there is no difference. But ubuntu does have a different kernel, it does have edits to stuff to various tools aswell having various tools which debian doesn't have.
3) If you don't know the difference between ubuntu and debian it doesn't matter which one you use.
4) Automatically installing upgrades is a security risk not a security measure.
baka *grumbles*
1) No. Even in unstable a lot of custom software like bt clients are older than the uncompiled versions on their web sites.
2) You're restating what I said originally. Ubuntu is just like debian but with more crap.
3) There obviously is a difference or I wouldn't recommend one over the other.
4) Debian stable has different update trees... ones that are specifically to patch exploits only, for obvious security reasons. Look it up..
1) If you know what you're doing yea you can. It's called using other repos. This provides you with an easy way to update packages.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielleD87
2) No, I am pointing out that the difference is actually way more than your implying. Also they have the same gui frontend, gnome. They just use different themes/skins.
3) I highly doubt you do.
4) Installing stuff automatically is a security threat, doesn't matter who the source is. Look it up...
my personal preference is ubuntu.