Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Server OS - Page 2
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Server OS

2»

Comments

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    @TimboJones said: Like what? I always thought Debian and especially Ubuntu were the changing one's since Centos is released far less often and targets enterprises. And pretty much everything they change is a result of something broken with many issues.

    Debian 10 vs. IBM RHEL 8 (I like calling it that because it gives Linux fans a shudder)...doesn't seem that different in terms of frequency. I can't/won't defend Ubuntu.

    @TimboJones said: Full disclosure, I welcomed systemd and firewalld as it allowed me to never have to fuck with manually editing start scripts and iptables.

    Two prime examples.

    firewalld is change for change's sake. New commands with new syntax, same functionality. Of course, they also changed iptables for nftables or whatever it is.

    systemd is also change for change's sake...solving problems that no one knew they had until RedHat said they were problems. In 25+ years of adminning Unix systems, how slow they booted was never once a concern. But RedHat wanted a svchost.exe for Linux.

    Personally, I have to edit systemd unit files all the time. Whenever you install software that isn't through the package manager (or your own software), you typically have to create a unit file. It's no harder than an rc.d script but it's no easier, either.

    Eh...it's Linux. Any kind of Linux is the C++ of operating systems.

    @TimboJones said: But Wi-Fi on debian is a dumpster fire.

    (cough) NetworkManager (cough)

  • After running CentOS for years, since 2 years I am running Debian on mostly all my Linux servers. I think Debian is more stable.

    But I think Fedora is quite speedy too, though a bit too niche. Fedora is especially nice for LiquidSoap installs.

  • LeeLee Veteran

    I just prefer CentOS, it's what I know, have been using forever and works.

  • I like Debian and using it for the last several years, tried Centos but the packages were out of date and were unusable for me.

  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker
    edited October 2020

    FWIW, I just recently came across a small study on package manager performance. The gist: rpm about 2 or 3 times slower than apt which again is a lot slower (something like 4 or 5 times) than alpine's apk.

    Oh and as systemd came up, IMO that's a festering boil that keeps and keeps giving. I only use linuxen without systemd; that's one of my primary conditions.

    @raindog308 said:
    firewalld is change for change's sake. New commands with new syntax, same functionality. Of course, they also changed iptables for nftables or whatever it is.

    systemd is also change for change's sake...solving problems that no one knew they had until RedHat said they were problems. ... But RedHat wanted a svchost.exe for Linux.

    Rudely put but perfectly right. "svchost.exe for Linux", I'll remember that one, hehe

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • @raindog308 said:
    being old enough to remember the hideous Unix GUIs of the 80s and 90s

    CDE was a perfectly good GUI. XFce (version 3) copied it and has become a pretty popular desktop environment, though XFce4 doesn't look very much like CDE anymore.

    NextStep was good as well, not that anybody used it.

  • @eva2000 said:
    I'm a CentOS guy as I know the ins and outs very well and workaround most issues I come across in a timely fashion. But I always thought LET was more Ubuntu/Debian centric, so surprised by the poll results so far

    • Ubuntu 15.38%
    • CentOS 46.15%

    I guess because the most popular control panel for shared hosting service promotes CentOS, and LET is full of the providers or at least admins of hosting services.

  • AlwaysSkintAlwaysSkint Member
    edited October 2020

    @raindog308 said: Debian 10 vs. IBM RHEL 8 (I like calling it that because it gives Linux fans a shudder)

    Hmm, I actually quite liked AIX, once I got my head around their new-fangled disc terminology (LVM lookalike).
    Still don't understand why anyone installs Ubuntu on a server. :-/
    I'm agnostic between debian and CentOS though the latter has a better install routine, IMO - no assumption of DHCP which is plain stupid for a server.

  • Honestly - i just try to use right tool for the job.
    Linux is all the same - all software is the same (including omnipresent systemd), the only difference that remains are distribution "quirks" like lack of certain software, default settings etc. So if i want to use zfs, for example, i will not use centos which does not have it by default. I will either use freebsd or some distro which has builtin support. If i want reliable long term support - i will use rhel. If i want to play games (or run game-related stuff like game servers) i will use ubuntu or windows. Etc, etc.
    Windows has good things too, for example microsoft's implementation of offline data deduplication is pretty good - it is simple, stable and efficient.

  • AmigaOS, and if not available, BeOS then.

  • @raindog308 said:
    Debian 10 vs. IBM RHEL 8 (I like calling it that because it gives Linux fans a shudder)...doesn't seem that different in terms of frequency. I can't/won't defend Ubuntu.

    But how many Debian releases since Centos 7? Since Centos 6?

    firewalld is change for change's sake. New commands with new syntax, same functionality. Of course, they also changed iptables for nftables or whatever it is.

    No, it's not. And you just made that point, they can change the lower layer without having to stick with ancient iptables that is getting replaced by more modern versions pretty much every where.

    systemd is also change for change's sake...solving problems that no one knew they had until RedHat said they were problems. In 25+ years of adminning Unix systems, how slow they booted was never once a concern. But RedHat wanted a svchost.exe for Linux.

    Lol, I'll just say problems you didn't know existed. There's a whole lot of putting hands over ears and pretending there's no problem.

    Personally, I have to edit systemd unit files all the time. Whenever you install software that isn't through the package manager (or your own software), you typically have to create a unit file. It's no harder than an rc.d script but it's no easier, either.

    Sure, but editing isn't creating. Install from source still usually provides a unit file to the user. Other than editing user running, sickchill is the only software I can recall having to provide that myself.

    @TimboJones said: But Wi-Fi on debian is a dumpster fire.

    (cough) NetworkManager (cough)

    Again, denying problems that have always existed that's been a complete shit show from the start. You can install three different distros on same hardware and get different experience (all being hassles).

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    @AlwaysSkint said: Hmm, I actually quite liked AIX, once I got my head around their new-fangled disc terminology (LVM lookalike).

    AIX has two virtues: (1) it is entirely consistent, and (2) it is perfectly documented. I adminned it for a while in the 90s and while it never quite felt right to me, it was very easy to figure out.

    Thanked by 1AlwaysSkint
  • Slackware. Always.

  • It depends on what I'm trying to do, I select os depending on the situation and task at hand. I have servers running RHEL, Debain, Ubuntu, Cloudlinux, Free- and OpenBSD and a few different versions of Windows.
    But if all things considered and it's entirely up to me, I would probably go with FreeBSD. It's simple, beautiful and it just fucking works, all the time.

    I also have customers that run pretty much anything that you can think of, and they rely on me to manage their servers so I get in contact with pretty much every os ever conceived, good or bad. Which is fun, but the thing that really wears me out is the "ancient ones" that refuses to let go of their old servers. Actually, it's only about a year ago that I retired a OS/2 Warp Server that had been in production for over 20 years. They hired me since "none of the other consultants had ever heard of it". :lol:

  • @rcy026 said: OS/2 Warp

    Seem to remember getting a copy on the front cover of a magazine, then they appeared everywhere! ;)

  • Anyone running Clear Linux? Lots of first place wins in Phoronix Linux benchmark comparison, but too much deviation from Centos for me for just a box or two.

Sign In or Register to comment.